https://agrospectrumasia.com/rssfeed/opinion/analysis analysis https://agrospectrumasia.com/features/89/4551/brazil-approves-1-75-billion-in-subsidies-for-fertilizer-and-bioinputs.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/features/89/4551/brazil-approves-1-75-billion-in-subsidies-for-fertilizer-and-bioinputs.html Thu, 27 Aug 2026 17:56:33 +0530 Brazil's Senate has approved legislation creating a program that could provide up to BRL 10 billion ($1.75 billion) in fiscal incentives over five years for the construction, expansion and modernization of fertilizer plants. The measure, established through the Fertilizer Industry Development Program (Profert) under Bill PL 699/2023, now goes to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva for final publication. The program is scheduled to operate from 2027 to 2031, with annual fiscal credits capped at BRL 2 billion ($350 million). Unused amounts may be carried over to the following year. The legislation is designed to reduce Brazil's dependence on imported fertilizers and strengthen domestic production of strategic agricultural inputs. “Once the bill is sanctioned, Brazil will have a national fertilizer policy, with incentives for domestic industry so that we can move away from this external dependence. Fertilizers mean national sovereignty,” said Senator Laércio Oliveira, author of the bill. Bioinputs included in the program The approved text expands the scope of Profert beyond conventional synthetic and mineral fertilizers. Companies producing fertilizers and their raw materials, bioinputs, biofertilizers and remineralizers will be eligible to compete for the incentives. According to the Legal Advisor of ABINBIO (Brazilian Association of Bioinput Industries), the Senate's approval of Bill 699/2023 (which creates the Fertilizer Industry Development Program - Profert) represents "an incentive for the Brazilian industry so that the country ceases to be dependent on imported fertilizers, with the establishment of a permanent industrial policy, which will contribute to increased investment in the sector, especially in R&D and innovation, guaranteeing the improvement and strengthening of the national bioinput sector." “It is important to highlight that the approved text expressly includes the bio-input and bio-fertilizer industries among the beneficiaries of incentives to boost and protect the national agricultural production chain against global logistical crises and price fluctuations in the international market, as well as representing an important factor for national food sovereignty,” said Sousa. According to the Legal Advisor of ABINBIO, to obtain the benefits, companies need to adopt criteria for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and supporting local development, elements that have the potential to attract investments and expand the participation of these technologies in Brazilian agriculture. The Brazilian market for bio-inputs and biofertilizers moves more than $1.5 billion and is expected to exceed $3 billion by 2030, according to data from the consulting firm DunhamTrimmer International Bio Intelligence. "Looking to the future through the lens of current trends and drivers, we predict that we are entering a process of dramatic change which will establish the biofertilizer segment as one of the most innovative and rapidly growing segments of global agriculture," says the Ignacio Moyano, Vice President of Business Development LATAM of DunhamTrimmer. Reducing fertilizer import dependence DunhamTrimmer emphasizes that Brazil's strong dependence on the import of synthetic chemical fertilizers (exposed by crises in the global supply chain) has transformed biofertilizers and biostimulants into a necessity for national sovereignty. Brazil is one of the world's largest agricultural producers but remains heavily dependent on imports of key nutrients, particularly nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. Senator Tereza Cristina, rapporteur of the legislation in the Senate, said this dependence leaves Brazilian agriculture vulnerable to international price fluctuations, disruptions to global supply chains and geopolitical tensions affecting fertilizer production and logistics. The new program seeks to address that vulnerability by creating incentives for domestic industrial capacity. The fiscal credits will be allocated through a competitive process, with the federal government determining which projects qualify for the program. The legislation also creates mechanisms for long-term financing and links part of the fiscal credit to actual production. National fertilizer blending target Profert also introduces a mechanism to increase the participation of domestically produced fertilizers in the Brazilian market. The National Council for Fertilizers and Plant Nutrition (Confert) will establish mandatory volume-based blending percentages for Brazilian-produced synthetic and mineral fertilizers in products sold, distributed and marketed domestically. The requirement will begin at 2 per cent and gradually increase to 10 per cent by 2031. Confert will be able to establish separate percentages for individual fertilizer components as long as the annual mandatory blending target is maintained. BRL 1 billion in freight exemptions The legislation also provides a tax exemption for the Additional Freight Charge for Renewal of the Merchant Navy (AFRMM) when transported goods are destined for projects approved under Profert. The exemption will apply from 2027 through 2031 and will be capped at BRL 200 million ($35 million) per year, or BRL 1 billion ($175 million) over the five-year period. Financial credits may also be directed to fertilizer producers or importers, provided that companies deduct the value of the credits received from their selling prices. Another component of the program is the allocation of federal resources to the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) to create financing lines for companies approved under Profert. Under the legislation, BNDES and participating financial institutions will assume the credit risks associated with the loans. Financial charges, repayment periods and other lending conditions will be established by Brazil's National Monetary Council (CMN). The financing mechanism is intended to complement the fiscal incentives and facilitate investments in new production facilities and modernization projects. Strategic implications for bioinputs The inclusion of bioinputs and biofertilizers gives the legislation significance beyond Brazil's traditional fertilizer industry. The country's biological-input sector has expanded rapidly in recent years, while the government and agricultural industry have increasingly emphasized domestic production, supply-chain, resilience, and technological development. DunhamTrimmer forecasts that the global biological-inputs market will grow by approximately 10 per cent between 2025 and 2030, reaching $25 billion by the end of the decade. Latin America is projected to grow faster, at around 14 per cent, with Brazil representing the region's principal market. For ABINBIO, the inclusion of biological technologies in Profert could strengthen the domestic industrial base and create incentives for additional investment in production, R&D, and innovation. “The reduction of this dependence is relevant not only to agricultural policy, but also to food and nutritional security, economic stability and the resilience of Brazil's agribusiness supply chains,” Tereza Cristina said. The legislation reflects a broader effort to treat fertilizer and biological-input production as strategic components of Brazil's agricultural security, particularly following supply-chain disruptions associated with the Russia-Ukraine war and conflicts in the Middle East. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/reports-white-papers/89/4230/why-indias-fertiliser-security-can-no-longer-be-separated-from-energy-security.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/reports-white-papers/89/4230/why-indias-fertiliser-security-can-no-longer-be-separated-from-energy-security.html Tue, 07 Jul 2026 13:06:21 +0530 For decades, agricultural strategy rested upon a reassuring trinity of land, water, and seeds. It was a stable geometry of governance, almost Euclidean in its simplicity, upon which the grand architecture of food security was assumed to rest. However, history has a mischievous habit of adding footnotes in geopolitical ink. The Russia–Ukraine war offered, in effect, a masterclass in the weaponisation of agricultural interdependence. When conflict disrupted exports from two of the world's foremost suppliers of wheat, corn and sunflower oil, global grain markets convulsed with almost theatrical immediacy. Food prices soared to historic highs, import-dependent nations scrambled to secure supplies, and agricultural commodities were transformed from mundane items of trade into instruments of strategic leverage. A regional war, in remarkably short order, metastasised into a global inflationary contagion. The Red Sea crisis provided a second, equally sobering lesson. Attacks on commercial shipping along one of the world's most vital maritime arteries forced vessels to abandon the Suez Canal and undertake the far longer voyage around the Cape of Good Hope. Transit times stretched, freight costs ballooned, insurance premiums surged, and supply chains—carefully calibrated over decades of globalisation—began to fray. What first appeared to be a shipping disruption soon revealed itself as an agricultural cost shock by another name. The Strait of Hormuz crisis, however, goes a step further. It exposes a deeper and more uncomfortable truth: modern food production is, at its core, an energy-dependent enterprise. Fertilisers are manufactured from natural gas, tractors run on diesel, irrigation depends on electricity, and food processing and cold chains require uninterrupted power. The farm may appear distant from geopolitics, but it is tethered to it at every stage. For India, with its dual dependence on imported energy and fertiliser inputs, this linkage is especially consequential. As Rahul Mirchandani, Managing Director of Aries Agro Ltd, observes, “India has entered the Kharif season with reasonably comfortable fertiliser stocks, but prolonged disruption would raise landed costs and create availability concerns. Rising energy costs directly impact ammonia and urea production, increasing the government's subsidy burden on urea, DAP and other conventional fertilisers.” It is for this reason that the Strait of Hormuz can no longer be regarded merely as an energy chokepoint. Nearly a fifth of the world's petroleum consumption and some 80 million tonnes of LNG pass through its narrow waters each year. Less appreciated, but perhaps equally significant, is the fact that roughly one-third of global urea exports and up to 30 per cent of ammonia trade also transit this corridor. For India, Hormuz is not merely a distant maritime passage. It is an unseen but indispensable pillar of food security—one through which the geopolitics of energy increasingly shapes the economics of every harvest. That vulnerability was laid bare with startling speed following the military escalation of February 28, 2026, under Operation Epic Fury. What began as a geopolitical confrontation swiftly metastasised into a logistical paralysis. Commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz ground to a halt, major shipping lines suspended Suez Canal transits, and airspace across much of the Gulf was abruptly closed. Within hours, vessels were being rerouted around Africa's Cape of Good Hope, while those already inside the Persian Gulf sought refuge in ports from Jebel Ali to Doha. The scale of the disruption was extraordinary. By March 2, more than 138 container vessels carrying nearly 470,000 TEUs were stranded inside the Gulf. Industry giants including MSC, CMA CGM, Maersk, COSCO and Hapag-Lloyd found themselves caught in a maritime bottleneck of historic proportions. Predictably, costs surged. Emergency conflict and war-risk surcharges ran into thousands of dollars per container, while rising fuel prices, rerouting expenses and insurance premiums compounded the burden. By mid-March, the crisis had evolved from a regional security challenge into a systemic supply-chain shock. Voyages between Asia and Europe suddenly required an additional 10–14 days, while congestion rippled through alternative hubs from Singapore and Colombo to Mundra and Salalah. Diplomatic efforts proved futile. By April 12, vessel traffic through Hormuz had collapsed by more than 95 per cent from pre-conflict levels. One of the world's most important trade arteries had, for all practical purposes, ceased to function. The consequences for agriculture followed swiftly. Approximately one-third of global urea exports and up to 30 per cent of ammonia trade normally pass through Hormuz. Qatar’s QAFCO complex, one of the world’s largest urea producers, reportedly operated at sharply reduced levels. Urea prices surged by more than 60 per cent within weeks. Freight rates on Asia–Europe routes rose by around 20 per cent, while transpacific rates to the US West Coast increased by roughly 40 per cent compared with pre-war levels. For India, the immediate threat is not physical scarcity but escalating cost pressure. The country enters each agricultural cycle dependent on imported fertilisers, LNG, sulphur, phosphates, and potash. The government has responded with buffer inventories and substantial subsidy support. Fertiliser subsidy allocations rose from Rs 1.68 lakh crore (2024–25 budget) to Rs 1.92 lakh crore after additional approvals. For Kharif 2026, phosphatic and potassic fertiliser subsidies are estimated at Rs 41,534 crore, approximately Rs 4,317 crore higher than the previous season. India’s total fertiliser requirement for Kharif 2026 is projected at more than 390 lakh metric tonnes. Why Fertilisers Sit at the Epicentre If oil is the bloodstream of the global economy, then natural gas is its quieter, less theatrical but far more intimate counterpart in the realm of agriculture—and fertilisers are the point at which this invisible circulation is transmuted into something politically consequential: Food. It is one of the defining paradoxes of our age that the most technologically sophisticated food system in human history is also among its most geopolitically fragile. For beneath the reassuring vocabulary of yields, hybrids, and harvest cycles lies a far more elemental dependency: Energy. Nearly 80 per cent of ammonia production costs stem from natural gas, rendering nitrogen fertilisers less an agricultural input than a chemically transformed extension of global energy markets. Ammonia anchors the nitrogen chain, feeding into urea—the most widely used fertiliser in India and, arguably, one of the most consequential commodities in its agrarian economy. The scale of this dependence is neither marginal nor theoretical. India consumes approximately 35 million tonnes of urea annually, a figure that reflects both the sheer scale of its agricultural system and the structural limits of domestic nutrient production. Despite meaningful local manufacturing capacity, India remains persistently reliant on imported LNG, ammonia, phosphates, and potash. In effect, it does not merely import fertilisers; it imports the external conditions under which food becomes possible. The latest data from the World Bank Group brings this into sharp focus. The global fertiliser price index rose by more than 12 per cent in Q1 2026 (quarter-on-quarter), marking its sixth increase in seven quarters, and by April 2026 reached its highest level since October 2022. Within this surge, urea led the rally, while phosphate and potash markets exhibited relatively moderated movements. Yet even this moderation demands caution. Prices remain below the extraordinary peaks of 2021 and 2022, when fertiliser markets surged by more than 100 per cent and 55 per cent respectively, following disruptions in Russia and Belarus—two foundational suppliers of global nutrients. Those episodes had already demonstrated that fertiliser markets are, in essence, energy markets in agricultural disguise. However the present crisis is not occurring in a vacuum.  During 2022, European ammonia production collapsed as natural gas prices surged in the aftermath of the Russia–Ukraine war. Ammonia plants across the continent either sharply curtailed operations or shut down entirely as production economics disintegrated. The effects propagated outward with remarkable speed: a global fertiliser price shock that reached farmers in Brazil’s soybean belt and Bangladesh’s rice fields with equal force. India, while partially insulated through aggressive subsidy expansion, nonetheless absorbed a significant fiscal shock. The lesson was unambiguous: when natural gas prices rise, ammonia production contracts; when ammonia contracts, fertiliser supply tightens; and when fertiliser supply tightens, global food systems enter synchronized distress. Against this historical backdrop, the current Strait of Hormuz crisis acquires its full significance. Beneath India’s narrative of agricultural self-reliance lies a less acknowledged dependency. The nation continues to import approximately 10 million tonnes of urea each year; ICRIER estimates that 5.6 million tonnes were imported in 2024–25 alone, accounting for nearly 15 per cent of domestic demand. At the same time, India sourced close to 27 million tonnes of LNG, much of it from the hydrocarbon-rich states of West Asia. Collectively, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, the UAE, and Bahrain account for nearly 37 per cent of India’s fertiliser imports, in addition to supplying essential inputs such as ammonia, sulphur, and LNG for domestic production.  The consequence is unmistakable: The foundations of India’s nitrogen economy rest not merely on domestic policy and agronomy, but on the stability of a region whose geopolitical convulsions can reverberate directly through the country’s fertiliser supply chain. The market reaction has been swift and quantifiable. The World Bank notes that fertiliser prices are projected to rise by more than 30 per cent in 2026, driven by higher input costs—especially nitrogen and phosphate fertilisers—and sustained global demand. A moderation is expected only in 2027, contingent upon restored supply chains and incremental capacity additions. But the balance of risks remains decidedly skewed upward, particularly if energy prices remain elevated or if Hormuz-linked disruptions extend beyond 2026 Q3. Energy Is Agriculture's Hidden Input The numbers, taken together, do not merely describe a disruption—they describe a system under strain, where geography, energy and trade converge into a tightly wound transmission mechanism of risk. At the centre of this architecture lies the Middle East, with much of this energy flowing, in the normal course of commerce, through the Strait of Hormuz—a narrow maritime chokepoint that has migrated from the margins of geopolitics to its very centre. Since 1 March 2026, most commercial shipping lines have suspended or curtailed operations through the route due to heightened security risks. Markets have reacted with immediate force. Brent crude has surged to $82–84 per barrel from $66–67 in January–February 2026, according to Crisil. Asian spot LNG prices have climbed even more sharply, from about $10/MMBtu to $24–25/MMBtu. These are not incremental adjustments but macroeconomic shockwaves—repricing the cost of energy, and by extension, the cost of everything that depends on it. As Vinod Goyal, CEO of Agricare Corporation, notes, “Domestic factories use LNG to manufacture nitrogen-based fertilisers like urea. With 55–65 per cent of India's LNG arriving from the Middle East, reduced gas supplies have forced multiple factories to halt production. The crisis has also disrupted supplies of sulphur and phosphoric acid, both critical for DAP manufacturing.” His observation lays bare an uncomfortable truth: fertilisers are not merely agricultural inputs; they are energy transformed into nutrients. Urea is natural gas in granular form. DAP is the product of globally traded minerals moving through vulnerable supply chains. When LNG prices spike, ammonia costs rise; when ammonia tightens, fertiliser markets follow.  Yet, hydrocarbons are merely the opening act. Compounding this vulnerability is India’s dependence on imported liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), with roughly two-thirds sourced externally and the overwhelming share originating in the Middle East. LPG is primarily a household fuel, meaning its price transmission bypasses industrial buffers and enters directly into kitchens. Only about 10 per cent is used industrially, limiting corporate exposure but amplifying its social sensitivity. The disruption extends well beyond energy markets into the arteries of global trade. Freight rates across air and sea corridors have risen sharply, while insurance premiums for cargo moving through exposed maritime routes have escalated with equal urgency, adding a persistent layer of margin compression across trade-linked sectors. Nowhere is this structural exposure more pronounced than in fertilisers, where chemistry and geopolitics intersect with unusual intensity. India imports about 30 per cent of its fertiliser requirement, with nearly 40 per cent of these imports sourced from the Middle East, which also supplies around 30 per cent of imports of rock phosphate, phosphoric acid, and muriate of potash. More critically, the region sits upstream of domestic production itself, accounting for roughly 60–65 per cent of LNG imports and 75–80 per cent of ammonia imports required for fertiliser manufacturing. In such a configuration, fertilisers cease to be merely an agricultural input; they become a derivative instrument of energy geopolitics. It is at the consumption end, however, that the abstraction of global shocks acquires its most intimate—and politically consequential—form. Pushan Sharma, Director at Crisil Intelligence, captures this translation from geopolitics to kitchen economics with disarming clarity. As he notes, “The cost of home-cooked vegetarian and non-vegetarian thalis increased 5 per cent and 7 per cent year-on-year, respectively, in May, driven by higher prices of tomatoes, vegetable oil and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG).” In other words, macroeconomic turbulence is no longer an external headline; it is a line item in the daily plate. The underlying food inflation mechanics, Pushan further explains, are sharply differentiated. “Tomato prices surged 57 per cent to Rs 36 per kg from Rs 23 per kg in May 2025, primarily on account of a 3–4 per cent decline in production. Meanwhile, global supply-side pressures pushed up vegetable oil and LPG prices by 8 per cent and 7 per cent on-year, respectively.” The asymmetry is telling: small supply contractions, when filtered through fragile logistics and global energy stress, translate into disproportionate price spikes. Yet even within this inflationary current, the system retains pockets of absorption. Sharma points to the stabilising role of staples: “Prices of pulses are expected to be subdued supported by comfortable domestic availability,” aided by higher projected production in marketing year 2027 and robust government stocks of around 43 lakh tonnes—the highest in three years—built through procurement under the Price Support Scheme. Even as import uncertainties around tur from Mozambique persist, duty-free imports of tur and urad, along with buffer stocks, are expected to cap upside pressures. At the edible oil frontier, the transmission is even more explicit. As Jayashree Nandakumar, Director at Crisil Ratings, observes, “Since the West Asia conflict began, the average import price of sunflower crude oil has risen to $1,420–1,440 per tonne, compared with $1,275 per tonne on average for the trailing 12 months,” with a weakening rupee and higher freight costs compounding landed inflation. This upstream shock is already visible at retail level: refined sunflower oil now trades at Rs 170–175 per litre versus around Rs 150 in January 2026. Substitution effects are beginning to reshape demand itself. With rice bran and soybean oils cheaper by Rs 10–20 per litre, consumers are gradually shifting away from sunflower oil, with demand projected to fall by nearly 10 per cent in fiscal 2027, opines Crisil.  The World Bank data reinforces the transmission with striking clarity. The global fertiliser price index rose over 12 per cent in Q1 2026, its sixth increase in seven quarters, reaching the highest level since October 2022. The natural gas price index climbed 24 per cent in March 2026 after the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Asian LNG prices surged nearly 94 per cent, while European benchmarks rose 59 per cent, even as the United States remained relatively insulated due to strong domestic supply—an instructive reminder that global shocks originate broadly but are absorbed unevenly. India sits at the sharper end of this system. It imports 88 per cent of its crude oil, about half of which typically passes through Hormuz, along with over 60 per cent of LPG and more than half of LNG imports. The resulting inflation transmission is layered: 71 per cent from primary energy, 27 per cent from downstream commodities such as fertilisers and chemicals, and just 2 per cent from freight and insurance. Physical stress adds another dimension, with gas allocations to fertiliser plants cut to 70 per cent of prior levels, signalling scarcity rather than price adjustment. Air transport costs, meanwhile, have risen 23.7 per cent due to petroleum intensity. Food inflation continued its upward trajectory, rising to 4.8 per cent in May, as persistent heatwaves disrupted supply chains and exerted renewed pressure on the prices of vegetables, dairy products, and eggs, according to a Crisil analysis. The report noted that part of the estimated 36-basis-point direct impact on CPI from the cumulative Rs 7.5 per litre increase in petrol and diesel prices during May has already been reflected in inflation data, with the remaining pass-through likely to materialise in June. At the same time, fuel inflation (covering electricity, gas, and other fuels) edged up marginally to 0.8 per cent. “While base effects continued to temper the overall rise, electricity deflation narrowed and LPG as well as PNG inflation eased on a year-on-year basis, even as sequential price increases remained evident,” said Dharmakirti Joshi, Chief Economist at Crisil Limited. He noted that inflation in alternative fuels such as kerosene, coal, and firewood accelerated further, reflecting substitution pressures as consumers increasingly turned to these options amid higher LPG costs and supply constraints. “Looking ahead, fuel inflation is likely to remain sticky—particularly for LPG—given ongoing geopolitical tensions in West Asia and the recent Rs 29 per cylinder increase in domestic LPG prices. The impact of this hike is expected to be reflected in June inflation data,” Joshi added. Corporate exposure follows a clear hierarchy. Petronet LNG Ltd sits at the most vulnerable end through regasification volumes. Fertiliser firms—National Fertilizers Ltd, Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd, and Deepak Fertilisers & Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd—face margin compression. Refiners absorb dual input shocks, city gas distributors pass through price pressure, while ONGC, Reliance Industries Ltd, and GAIL (India) Ltd gain selectively from pricing strength and supply re-routing. What emerges is a single integrated system where a maritime chokepoint, a gas molecule, a fertiliser bag, and a plate of food are bound in one continuous chain of consequence. Beyond Hormuz: Reimagining Fertiliser Security If the Strait of Hormuz crisis has delivered one lesson with unmistakable clarity, it is this: food security and energy security are no longer separate policy domains. They are, in effect, different chapters of the same story. For much of independent India's history, agriculture was narrated through the familiar grammar of monsoons, irrigation networks, seeds, soils and yields. Yet the turbulence of 2026 has revealed a more intricate reality. In an age where fertilisers are forged from natural gas, nutrient chains depend upon maritime corridors, and farm economics can be reshaped by events unfolding thousands of kilometres away, the story of food increasingly begins not in the field, but in the geopolitics of energy. India maintains one of the world’s most generous fertiliser support mechanisms, fixing the retail price of urea at a mere Rs 242 per 50-kg bag (approximately $60 per tonne) and absorbing the often-vast gulf between this politically mandated price and the realities of global import markets through a sizeable subsidy outlay borne by the exchequer. National Fertilizers Limited (NFL) recently received bids as low as $449.3 per tonne, including freight, for importing 1.7 million tonnes of urea—a dramatic retreat from the $959 per tonne bids quoted in Indian Potash Limited's (IPL) earlier 2.5 million-tonne tender during the height of the Hormuz panic. Yet the significance lies not in the decline, but in the extraordinary volatility itself. Within weeks, urea prices travelled from near-crisis levels to relative moderation, illustrating how profoundly nutrient markets have become entangled with energy prices, shipping disruptions and geopolitical risk. The fertiliser bag, once regarded as a routine agricultural input, has quietly become a barometer of global instability. For New Delhi, this volatility carries a fiscal price. The government's longstanding commitment to insulating farmers from global price shocks has required ever-larger subsidy interventions. As Vinod Goyal observes, "To keep retail prices cheap for everyday farmers, the Indian government heavily subsidizes fertilizer. To counteract the Hormuz crisis, the government hiked subsidies by 11 per cent. This response means the national fertilizer subsidy bill will overshoot its budget estimate by an extra Rs 200 to Rs 250 billion, placing a massive strain on the country's finances." Yet the deeper question extends beyond subsidy arithmetic. How long can India continue importing not merely fertilisers, but the geopolitical stability upon which fertiliser production itself depends? For Komal Shah Bhukhanwala, Executive Director of SML Limited and Sumil, the answer lies in technological transformation. "Escalating geopolitical tensions and energy volatility are exposing the risks of India’s dependence on imported fertilizer raw materials and global supply chains," she notes. "In this environment, the government should advocate the use of high Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE) fertilizers and advanced nutrient technologies that can reduce bulk fertilizer dependence by 25–50 per cent." Such innovations, she argues, offer not merely efficiency gains but a pathway towards a more resilient and self-sustaining agricultural ecosystem. The timing could scarcely be more consequential. Geopolitical uncertainty is now intersecting with climatic anxiety. Rahul Mirchandani warns that meteorological agencies are signalling the possibility of a Super El Niño-like weather pattern, potentially exposing crops to additional heat and moisture stress. At the same time, persistent uncertainty surrounding Chinese fertiliser exports continues to tighten global supply chains. The convergence of climate risk and nutrient insecurity threatens to create a far more complex challenge than either factor would pose in isolation. It is for this reason that fertiliser security is increasingly being viewed through a strategic lens. "India must now treat fertiliser security as part of national food security through strategic reserves, diversified sourcing, domestic urea capacity expansion, overseas mineral asset partnerships and greater policy thrust on biological and natural nutrient alternatives," argues Dushyant K. Tyagi, CEO of Farmgate Technologies. But resilience cannot be built through stockpiles alone. It requires a more sophisticated redesign of the entire supply architecture. Anand Chandra, Co-founder and Executive Director of Arya.ag, advocates a broader approach encompassing diversified sourcing, feedstock security, stronger domestic production, pre-season planning and granular visibility over district-level demand and inventories. Strategic reserves may have a role, he suggests, but they must be tailored to India's agricultural realities rather than borrowed wholesale from energy-sector playbooks. There is, however, another dimension to the crisis—one that speaks not of vulnerability but of opportunity. As global supply chains undergo a fresh bout of introspection, Siddharth Gupta, Co-Founder of Atomgrid, believes India has an opening to reposition itself. "When Indian companies stop being described as 'China alternatives' and start being the first call, when customers build their global supply chain architecture around India rather than as a hedge against China—that is the real transition," he says. The transformation may take years, but moments of disruption often accelerate shifts that would otherwise unfold over decades. Taken together, these developments underscore a larger reality. The challenge before India is not merely to secure the next cargo of urea or expand the next subsidy allocation. It is to build an agricultural and economic system that is less vulnerable to external shocks and better equipped to navigate an increasingly uncertain global landscape. Recent events have offered a stark reminder of that vulnerability. The current ceasefire between the United States and Iran and the subsequent reopening of the Strait of Hormuz triggered an immediate response across global markets. The Indian rupee climbed to a five-week high of Rs 94.45 against the US dollar in intraday trade, recovering 2.6 per cent from its record low of Rs 96.96 on May 20, before closing at Rs 94.71. The rally was accompanied by a sharp decline in crude oil prices, with Brent falling below $85 per barrel and hovering around $83 as fears of supply disruptions eased. The speed of the market reaction highlighted the extent to which geopolitical developments continue to shape economic outcomes far beyond their point of origin. For India, where agriculture remains closely linked to energy markets through input costs, logistics and inflation dynamics, such volatility carries implications that extend well beyond currency and commodity trading floors. As FAO Chief Economist Máximo Torero has observed, "While food markets remain more stable than during previous crises, the current shock underscores the vulnerability of interconnected energy and agrifood systems." The recent Hormuz episode reinforces that assessment. A diplomatic standoff in one of the world's most strategically important waterways was enough to unsettle energy markets, move currencies and alter economic sentiment across importing nations. --- ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/reports-white-papers/89/4190/defining-trends-in-asian-agriculture-during-h1-2026.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/reports-white-papers/89/4190/defining-trends-in-asian-agriculture-during-h1-2026.html Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 The first six months of 2026 will be remembered in Asian agriculture as a season of two clocks running at very different speeds. One clock — the one ticking inside research institutes, regulatory agencies and the slide decks of agri-food investors — moved unusually fast. Genome-edited rice advanced toward farmers' fields in India. China finalised its second registration list of genetically modified corn and soybean varieties. Singapore quietly logged its fourth cultivated-meat approval and published, for the first time, a consolidated public list of every novel food it has cleared. India's Union Budget rewrote the language of farm policy around artificial intelligence and digital public infrastructure. By almost any measure of institutional momentum, the science and the statecraft of agriculture in Asia accelerated. The other clock belongs to the weather, the soil and the balance sheet — and it told a harder story. The India Meteorological Department opened the year with its most pessimistic monsoon forecast in more than two decades. Venture capital into the region's agritech sector remained roughly two-thirds below its peak. And the gap between a technology cleared in a lab and a technology working on a smallholding the size of a tennis court stayed stubbornly, frustratingly wide. The defining tension of H1 2026 was not whether Asian agriculture is innovating. It plainly is. The question is whether that innovation is reaching the ground fast enough to matter when the rains fall short. The science finally moves For more than a decade, the story of crop biotechnology in much of Asia was a story of stalled promise. India had approved exactly one genetically modified crop for commercial cultivation — Bt cotton, back in 2006 — and the political and regulatory machinery around transgenics had effectively seized up. What changed, and what came into sharper focus through H1 2026, is that the region has found a way around that impasse: genome editing. The distinction matters enormously. Where conventional GM crops carry foreign DNA and trigger the full weight of biosafety regulation, genome-edited varieties produced through SDN-1 and SDN-2 techniques edit a plant's own genes and leave no foreign genetic material behind. A 2022 office memorandum from India's environment ministry exempted such transgene-free edited plants from the strictest tier of approval, requiring only that an institutional biosafety committee certify the absence of exogenous DNA. That single regulatory differentiation has done what years of debate over GM could not: it has put new traits on a credible path to farmers. The proof points are now real rather than theoretical. India's two genome-edited rice lines — an improved Samba Mahsuri and an edited version of MTU-1010 — cleared multi-location trials, with the enhanced Samba Mahsuri showing a roughly 19 percent average yield uplift and the MTU-1010 variant demonstrating tolerance to saline and alkaline soils. A third candidate, a canola-quality mustard edited for disease and pest resistance, has been moving through its second year of trials across sixteen locations, with a possible release flagged for later in 2026. Behind these headline varieties sits a deeper strategic play: Indian scientists have been advancing indigenous gene-editing tools — TnpB-based miniature editors and platforms beyond the patent-heavy Cas9 — explicitly to reduce dependence on foreign intellectual property. A pipeline that includes drought-tolerant rice and maize, beta-carotene-rich banana, and high-oleic groundnut is no longer a wish list; it is a regulatory queue. China spent the half-year pressing in the same direction, but from a position of far greater scale and urgency. As the world's largest importer of corn and soybeans, Beijing has framed seed self-reliance as a matter of national security, and its biotechnology programme reflects that framing. By early 2026 the country had finalised its second registration list of GM corn and soybean varieties — building on the first batch of production licences issued at the end of 2023 — and had approved its first gene-edited wheat and corn for domestic cultivation. The government's own projections put potential yield gains from these varieties at around 12 percent, and some industry analysts believe the eventual planted area could reach tens of millions of hectares. China still moves cautiously, public ambivalence about GM food remains real, and foreign investment in its agricultural biotech sector is largely walled off. But the trajectory through H1 2026 was unmistakable: a deliberate, state-driven push to close the yield gap with the Americas using domestically owned genetics. Two of Asia's largest agricultural economies, in other words, spent the first half of 2026 demonstrating that the long biotech stalemate is breaking — not through the transgenic crops that dominated the last era's debates, but through precision editing that sidesteps both the regulatory burden and much of the political resistance. Policy learns to speak in code If genome editing was the science story of H1 2026, the digitalisation of farm policy was its administrative counterpart — and nowhere was the shift more explicit than in India's Union Budget for 2026-27, presented at the start of February. The numbers themselves told a story of consolidation rather than transformation. Agriculture and allied activities drew an allocation in the region of ₹1.62 lakh crore, up around 7 percent on the previous year's revised estimates, with a separate fertiliser subsidy of roughly ₹1.71 lakh crore continuing to absorb global price shocks on farmers' behalf. Direct income support under PM-KISAN held flat at ₹63,500 crore for a third consecutive year — a sign that the transfer is now treated as a baseline entitlement rather than a lever to be pulled. The more revealing signals lay in where new money and new language went. The budget leaned hard into what one agtech commentator described as an "AI-first" vision of agriculture. The headline instrument was Bharat-VISTAAR, a multilingual, AI-enabled advisory platform funded at ₹150 crore and designed to knit together the AgriStack digital identity framework and the Indian Council of Agricultural Research's package of practices into something a farmer can actually query in their own language. Alongside it sat the continuing build-out of the Digital Agriculture Mission, with a stated ambition to generate unique digital IDs for 110 million farmers. The thematic centre of gravity shifted, too — away from the wheat-and-rice staples and toward high-value agriculture, with dedicated promotion schemes for coconut, cashew, cocoa and sandalwood, and a record allocation for fisheries built around the integrated development of 500 reservoirs. It would be easy to read all of this as unambiguous progress, and harder but more honest to note the tensions inside it. The same budget trimmed the flagship crop-insurance scheme, the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana, to its lowest allocation in years — a striking choice in a year when, by the government's own Economic Survey, weather shocks were inflicting heavier and more frequent yield losses. Allocations for agricultural research and education edged down even as the rhetoric of innovation rose. The architecture being built is genuinely impressive: a data layer, an AI advisory layer, a diversification push toward crops with better margins. Whether that architecture reaches the rainfed smallholder before the next failed monsoon does — that remains the open question of the entire enterprise. What the budget made unambiguous is the direction of travel. Across Asia, the policy conversation has moved decisively from inputs and subsidies toward data, diversification and digital infrastructure. The instruments now carry names like AgriStack and Bharat-VISTAAR rather than minimum support prices. The bet is that intelligence — delivered cheaply, at scale, in the right language — can do what decades of input subsidy could not: make 140 million Indian farmers more resilient to climate and market volatility. It is a serious bet. H1 2026 placed it; the field will settle it. The protein frontier grows up Few corners of Asian agri-food have generated more heat over the past five years than alternative protein, and few entered 2026 in greater need of a reality check. The first half of the year delivered both fresh regulatory milestones and a sober recalibration of expectations — and Singapore, as ever, sat at the centre of the story. The city-state remains the only place in Asia to have built a working, repeatable regulatory pathway for novel foods, and in H1 2026 it made that pathway newly transparent. In March, the Singapore Food Agency published its first consolidated public list of approved novel foods — fourteen products and ingredients spanning cultivated meat, algal protein and a range of fermentation-derived foods. For an industry that had long operated against a backdrop of case-by-case decisions, a centralised, citable register was more than housekeeping; it was a signal of regulatory maturity that the rest of the region will study closely. The approvals kept coming, too. In April, the Paris-based startup Parima — formed from the merger of Gourmey and Vital Meat — won clearance for cultivated duck, six months after its cultivated chicken was approved, making it the first company anywhere to hold regulatory green lights for two animal species and bringing Singapore's tally of approved cultivated-meat products to four. Parima's stated playbook is instructive: begin in high-end gastronomy, where a cultivated duck endorsed by Michelin-starred chefs can command a premium, then move toward targeted retail. Its production model — cells grown in suspension in standard industrial bioreactors, deployable in partner infrastructure across Asia-Pacific without rebuilding a facility from scratch — points to where the economics of this sector may eventually have to land. And yet the most important alternative-protein development of the half-year was arguably a step back rather than a step forward. Singapore confirmed that it is retiring its long-standing "30 by 30" local-production target in favour of a broader strategy — the Singapore Food Story 2 — built on four pillars: local production of protein and fibre, import diversification, stockpiling and global partnerships. Cultivated meat and other alternative proteins, the government made clear, are no longer counted as part of the near-term food-security plan. The reasons were candid: higher-than-expected production costs and weaker-than-expected consumer acceptance globally. The sector has not been abandoned — R&D funding continues, and officials left the door open to a larger future role "if and when" the economics turn — but the framing changed from imminent solution to long-term option. That recalibration is healthy, and it captures something true about the whole alternative-protein moment in Asia. The regulatory science is maturing; the regulatory transparency is improving; the species count is climbing. What has not yet arrived is the cost curve and the consumer pull that would turn a string of approvals into a meaningful share of the protein on Asian plates. H1 2026 was the half-year in which the industry stopped over-promising and started, more usefully, to grow up. The capital reckoning Underwriting all of this — the gene-editing pipelines, the digital platforms, the bioreactors — is capital, and the capital story of H1 2026 was one of hard-won discipline after an exuberant boom. The defining document arrived in April, when Omnivore, Beanstalk AgTech and Briter released a data-driven analysis of the agritech landscape across thirteen Southeast Asian markets, backed by the IFC, FMO Ventures and the Rabo Foundation. Its central claim was bullish: digitalisation and agritech adoption could unlock more than US$90 billion in annual GDP gains across Southeast Asia by 2033, in a region where agriculture contributes roughly 15 percent of GDP and employs up to 40 percent of the workforce. But the report's value lay in its candour about how that prize had been pursued so far. Agritech investment across the region peaked at over US$750 million in 2022 before falling nearly 70 percent by 2025 — a sharp correction as investors confronted the structural realities of fragmented value chains and the genuine difficulty of scaling ventures across markets that share a map but little else. The report's most useful conclusions were its uncomfortable ones. There is, it argued, no unified Southeast Asian market to conquer; roughly two-thirds of documented cross-border expansion attempts had failed, and premature regional expansion was the cause of more than 60 percent of venture collapses between 2022 and 2025. The most defensible opportunities, it concluded, are single-market plays built around the right value chain, the right business model and a local execution team — not the pan-regional land grabs that defined the boom years. As Omnivore's Mark Kahn put it, patient, disciplined capital that understands local market dynamics is what actually moves these ecosystems forward. Tellingly, the authors held up India as the instructive model — a market whose venture ecosystem matured through a hard decade of governance reform, exits and the unglamorous work of building market infrastructure. Development finance institutions and impact investors have committed a combined US$650 million to agrifood funds across the region and remain central to the capital stack, but the report was clear that the next phase of scaling will require a blend of equity, credit and concessional capital rather than venture money alone. For an industry that spent the early 2020s chasing valuations, this is a more sober and more durable foundation. The money flowing into Asian agritech in 2026 is more patient, more local and more honest about the structural friction of fragmented smallholder agriculture. That is not a retreat. It is the sector learning, expensively, how the region actually works. The field doesn't care about any of this And then there is the weather, which has the disconcerting habit of ignoring every register of approved novel foods and every line of an AI advisory platform. The single most consequential development of H1 2026 for hundreds of millions of Asian farmers was not a clearance or a funding round. It was the India Meteorological Department's first-stage forecast, issued in April, that the 2026 southwest monsoon would deliver around 92 percent of the long-period average — a below-normal season, and by some accounts the lowest first-stage forecast in at least twenty-five years. The climate signals behind the number were ominous: weak La Niña conditions transitioning toward neutral, with a meaningful probability of El Niño developing during the monsoon season itself. The historical record is unforgiving on this point — across the El Niño years India logged between 1951 and 2022, every drought year was an El Niño year. By mid-year the strain was already visible. The season opened well below normal, agriculture officials flagged El Niño risk across a dozen states and called for district-level contingency plans, and crop-weather monitors issued severe dry alerts across the soybean and groundnut belts, threatening to delay sowing and shorten the growing window. Roughly 60 percent of India's farmers depend on monsoon rainfall, and close to half the country's farmland lacks assured irrigation; the kharif crops sown from June — rice, soybean, cotton, pulses, groundnut — rely almost entirely on those rains. Reservoir buffers, fuller than in recent years, offer some cushion, and a late-developing positive Indian Ocean Dipole could yet offset part of the El Niño signal as it did in 2023. But variability, not the aggregate number, will decide the season. Ratings agencies were already pencilling in downside risks to agricultural growth and upside risks to food inflation. This is the context against which every laboratory triumph of the half-year has to be read. A genome-edited drought-tolerant rice is precisely the kind of innovation that matters in a 92-percent monsoon year — but the edited Samba Mahsuri reaching commercial scale and the drought-tolerant lines reaching farmers are still future events, not present realities. An AI advisory platform is exactly what a smallholder facing an erratic kharif season could use — but Bharat-VISTAAR's value depends entirely on whether it reaches remote, rainfed districts in time to change a planting decision. The crop-insurance scheme that would cushion a failed season was trimmed in the same budget that funded the AI platform. There is a related, quieter argument that gained traction in the region's agtech commentary at the start of 2026: that the sector has over-indexed on inventing new tools and under-invested in deploying the ones it already has. Asia-Pacific accounts for half of the 1.3 billion tonnes of food wasted globally each year; in South Asia, where a staggering share of the population is born underweight or stunted, around 40 percent of all food perishes before it is eaten. The toolbox to address this — from biologicals to gene-editing to AI robotics — is already substantial. The constraint is rarely the technology. It is the absence of a safety net that lets a smallholder absorb the risk of trying something new, and the persistent difficulty of tracing a benefit back to the tool that produced it. The most important agricultural work of 2026, on this reading, is less about the next breakthrough than about closing the distance between the breakthrough and the farm. Where the two clocks meet If H1 2026 had a single physical setting where its two clocks were visibly synchronised, it was the exhibition floor. In May, Agritechnica Asia returned to Bangkok under the theme "Farm. Farmer. Future." — co-located with HortEx Thailand, drawing around 350 exhibitors and an expected 18,000-plus visitors from across the region, and headlined by a new conference on smart agriculture and unmanned agricultural systems. Taiwan's Asia Agri-Tech Expo ran in the same month with a comparable emphasis on AI smart farming, automation and aquaculture. The Southeast Asian agricultural mechanisation market that these events serve is projected to keep growing at around 4 percent annually toward US$2.5 billion by 2028, driven by rice, sugarcane, cassava and maize across the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia. What these gatherings made tangible is the through-line of the entire half-year: physical AI is moving from the conference panel to the field. Robotics, sensors, unmanned systems and data platforms are no longer the speculative content of a startup zone; they are increasingly the practical content of a mechanisation strategy adapted to Asian production systems and smallholder economics. The relevant question across the region has shifted from whether the technology works to whether it can be put, affordably and durably, into the hands of the farmer who needs it. That is the right question, and it frames what the second half of 2026 will test. Watch for India's genome-edited mustard, which could secure release in the coming months and would mark the first edited oilseed to reach the field. Watch how the kharif season actually resolves once July and August — the months that carry the bulk of the rainfall and cover the critical growth stages — deliver their verdict on the El Niño signal. Watch whether the capital discipline the Omnivore report prescribed translates into the patient, single-market, locally led ventures it championed. And watch, at October's Asia-Pacific Agri-Food Innovation Summit in Singapore, whether the alternative-protein sector can show a cost curve to match its lengthening list of approvals. The first half of 2026 proved that Asian agriculture can innovate at speed across science, policy and capital. The genome editors are working, the AI platforms are funded, the regulatory pathways are maturing, and the money is wiser than it was. What the half-year could not yet prove is the only thing that ultimately counts: that this acceleration reaches the field before the field runs dry. The lab clock is fast. The field clock is the one keeping real time. Closing the distance between them is the work that remains. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3761/where-paint-protects-pollinators.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3761/where-paint-protects-pollinators.html Mon, 27 Apr 2026 12:13:12 +0530 Mark Titus shares how Nippon Paint India is turning coatings expertise into a tool for ecological and economic impact In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Mark Titus, President – Decorative Coatings Business at Nippon Paint India, shares how the company’s foray into apiculture goes beyond diversification to reflect a purpose-driven, ESG-led innovation strategy. He highlights how eco-friendly, GreenPro-certified coatings are being adapted to ensure hive durability while safeguarding bee health—an uncommon intersection of material science and biodiversity. Emphasizing measurable impact, Titus points to metrics like colony health, hive longevity, and farmer income uplift as key indicators of success. He underscores that the initiative is “impact-first but not impact-only,” with a long-term vision to build a scalable, self-sustaining ecosystem through strong partnerships and rural engagement. This move takes Nippon Paint into apiculture—far outside traditional coatings demand. How do you frame this internally: adjacent market expansion, ESG-led innovation, or a long-term rural strategy bet? We see our association with Humble Bee as a natural adjacency, driven by both purpose and capability. While it sits outside traditional coatings demand, it meaningfully leverages our core strengths in protective and sustainable coatings. For us, this is also an ESG-led innovation with strong long-term potential for rural impact. It’s less about diversification for scale, and more about extending our relevance into ecosystems where durability and sustainability truly matter. Many companies talk sustainability; few quantify it. What hard metrics will define success here - colony health, hive longevity, farmer income uplift, or something else entirely? Sustainability and responsible innovation are deeply embedded in Nippon Paint’s DNA. Guided by our ESG framework, we are committed to developing solutions that not only deliver performance but also create measurable environmental and social value. This initiative is a strong reflection of that approach where businesses, communities, and ecosystems grow together. From an ESG standpoint, success will be defined through clear metrics such as colony health and bee retention rates (Environmental), hive longevity and durability (Environmental), and improvements in honey yield and farmer income (Social). Coatings for beehives introduce a completely different performance benchmark—biological compatibility. What were the toughest technical trade-offs in ensuring durability without compromising bee health? At Nippon Paint India, eco-friendly, low to zero-VOC formulations have always been integral to our portfolio, and we are among the few in the industry to offer GreenPro-certified products - an eco-label awarded by the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) that recognises products meeting stringent environmental and sustainability standards across their lifecycle. We have leveraged our existing formulation of paints that are eco-friendly and highly durable to withstand harsh weather conditions - to coat the hives. Its proven durability against extreme climates and moisture make it an ideal solution, while ensuring the highest standards of environmental safety. While traditional coatings are primarily designed for protection, in this case, we also had to ensure zero harmful emissions and no disruption to bee behavior or their habitat - something we were able to achieve seamlessly with our eco-friendly, GreenPro-certified product. Reaching first-generation women farmers and tribal communities is notoriously difficult. Does Nippon Paint plan to build new distribution channels, or will this rely entirely on partners like Humble Bee? At Nippon Paint India, initiatives like NShakti - our pioneering program that empowers women to become professional painters - reflect our strong commitment to enabling self-reliance among women. This shared vision of empowerment makes it even more relevant for us to support such novel initiatives. Enabling sustainable livelihood opportunities for tribal women is a natural extension of this commitment.We also recognize that last-mile access is critical, especially when engaging with first-generation women farmers and tribal communities. At this stage, our approach is entirely partnership-led - working closely with organizations like Humble Bee that bring deep community connect and on-ground expertise.The focus is on trust-led adoption, not just reach. We are keen to collaborate with like-minded partners who share our vision, as we collectively work towards building a more sustainable and inclusive ecosystem for livelihoods. Is this initiative designed to become a self-sustaining business line, or will it remain impact-first with limited margin expectations? Where do you draw the line between profitability and purpose? This initiative is impact-first but not impact-only. Our goal is to build a self-sustaining model over time. In the early stages, the priority was on ecosystem building and demonstrating proof of impact and, currently, we are supporting this through a subsidized approach. Over the long term, we expect the model to achieve viability through scale and operational efficiencies. For us, profitability and purpose are not mutually exclusive - they must converge to create sustainable, long-term value. Low-VOC, eco-friendly coatings are not proprietary in isolation. What makes this model defensible—is it the formulation, the ecosystem partnerships, or early-mover advantage in apiculture infrastructure? While low-VOC coatings in themselves are not unique, what is far more difficult to replicate is the ecosystem approach. Our GreenPro certification gives us a clear edge, reinforcing the environmental credibility of our products. Additionally, our partnership-led model, combined with early on-ground learnings, enables us to build deep insights and create a strong first-mover advantage in this space.At its core, this initiative is driven by a shared vision to build a sustainable ecosystem through innovation aligned with Nippon Paint’s core DNA. The new-age beehive model by Humble Bee makes this partnership seamless, enabling a differentiated approach and laying the foundation for long-term impact. Does this signal a broader ambition for Nippon Paint India to move into agri-linked applications—storage, irrigation infrastructure, rural housing—or is apiculture a one-off experiment? This is certainly a strategic learning ground for us, reinforcing how coatings can play a meaningful role in protecting infrastructure beyond urban environments. Our approach remains tightly aligned to the relevance of this initiative. We will scale thoughtfully - guided by proven impact and clear outcomes, rather than pursuing expansion into new areas. For us, this is not about entering a new category; it’s about applying our expertise where it can create the most meaningful and lasting impact. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3705/ai-is-rewiring-future-of-energy-crops-ofer-haviv-ceo-evogene.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3705/ai-is-rewiring-future-of-energy-crops-ofer-haviv-ceo-evogene.html Mon, 20 Apr 2026 14:07:17 +0530 Gene-to-trait mapping and predictive breeding are accelerating the path to high-yield, climate-resilient castor varieties AgroSpectrum interview, Ofer Haviv, CEO Casterra ( subsidiary of Evogene ), outlines how castor oil is poised to transition from a niche industrial input to a scalable biofuel feedstock through advances in genetics, mechanization, and precision agronomy. He argues that aligning cost structures with major crops like soybean and palm—while avoiding food-versus-fuel conflicts—positions castor as a strategic alternative in a tightening regulatory landscape. Haviv emphasizes Brazil’s pivotal role, where castor can function as a second crop alongside soy, improving land efficiency without displacing food production. Looking ahead, he sees castor anchoring a broader bio-based economy, extending beyond fuels into chemicals and materials as supply scales and costs decline. From Niche to Scale Castor oil has traditionally been a high-value, niche industrial feedstock—what structural shifts in cost, yield, or demand are necessary to transform it into a globally scalable biofuel solution? Castor oil has historically occupied a niche position as a high-value industrial feedstock, largely due to limited scalability, fragmented cultivation practices, and relatively high production costs. Transitioning castor into a globally viable biofuel solution requires a fundamental structural shift across the value chain. This includes a significant reduction in cost per ton through yield improvement and large-scale adoption of modern agricultural practices. High-performance hybrid seed genetics must be deployed to ensure uniformity, disease resistance, and yield optimization across diverse geographies. Alongside this, tailored mechanization solutions—designed specifically for castor’s unique plant architecture—are critical to reducing dependency on manual labor and increasing operational efficiency. Advanced agronomic expertise, supported by precision agriculture tools and data-driven decision-making, further enhances productivity. Collectively, these shifts can reposition castor from a fragmented specialty crop into a scalable, globally traded commodity suitable for energy markets. Economics of Biofuel Feedstocks Given the historically tight margins in biofuels, how does Casterra’s model ensure that castor oil can compete economically with established feedstocks like soybean, palm, or corn-based inputs? The economic viability of biofuel feedstocks has historically been constrained by tight margins and competition with low-cost, high-volume crops such as soybean, palm, and corn. Casterra’s model addresses this challenge by integrating advanced genetics with optimized cultivation protocols, thereby lowering production costs and improving yield consistency. This approach aims to bring castor oil pricing in line with conventional feedstocks, making it a competitive alternative. Importantly, unlike soybean and corn—which are edible and subject to increasing regulatory scrutiny due to food-versus-fuel concerns—castor is a non-edible crop. Global regulatory trends are increasingly discouraging the use of food crops in biofuel production to safeguard food security and reduce environmental pressures. This regulatory tailwind strengthens castor’s positioning as a sustainable and compliant feedstock, enhancing its long-term economic attractiveness in global biofuel markets. Mechanization Breakthrough Your trials emphasize mechanized farming—how critical is mechanization in unlocking castor’s commercial viability, and what barriers still exist for adoption at scale in emerging markets? Mechanization is a cornerstone in unlocking the commercial viability of castor cultivation at scale. As agricultural labor becomes increasingly scarce and expensive, reliance on manual harvesting and planting methods is no longer sustainable. Mechanization enables uniform planting, efficient harvesting, and reduced operational costs, all of which are essential for transforming castor into a commodity crop. Casterra has proactively addressed this need by forming strategic partnerships with leading agricultural machinery providers to develop and adapt equipment suited for castor farming. However, adoption barriers persist, particularly in emerging markets where capital constraints, lack of technical expertise, and limited access to maintenance infrastructure hinder widespread mechanization. To overcome these challenges, scalable solutions such as cooperative farming models, equipment-sharing systems, and service-based mechanization offerings are being explored. These approaches can democratize access to technology and accelerate adoption across smallholder farming communities. Climate and Land Use Trade-offs As biofuel demand rises, how do you address concerns around land-use competition between energy crops and food production, particularly in regions like Brazil? One of the critical concerns in scaling biofuel crops is the potential competition with food production for arable land, especially in major agricultural regions like Brazil. Castor offers a compelling solution through its ability to function as a complementary crop rather than a competing one. It can be cultivated as a second crop following soybean harvest, utilizing residual soil moisture and the tail end of the rainy season. This dual-cropping system maximizes land productivity without displacing primary food crops. Furthermore, castor has demonstrated agronomic benefits in crop rotation systems, including improved soil health and enhanced soybean yields in subsequent planting cycles. Its relatively low water requirements and adaptability to marginal conditions further reduce pressure on critical resources. As a result, castor not only avoids land-use conflicts but actively contributes to more sustainable and efficient agricultural systems. AI-Driven Agriculture Meets Energy Transition How does Evogene Ltd. leverage its ChemPass AI platform to accelerate not just pharmaceutical discovery, but also the development of next-generation agricultural inputs and energy crops? Evogene Ltd. leverages its proprietary computational platform, ChemPass AI, to accelerate the development of next-generation agricultural inputs and energy crops. This platform enables the precise linkage of genes to desired traits, significantly shortening the breeding cycle and improving the accuracy of trait selection. By utilizing genetic markers and advanced predictive models, Evogene can rapidly develop castor varieties with enhanced yield, stress tolerance, and oil content. This technological edge not only benefits pharmaceutical and chemical discovery but also plays a pivotal role in advancing sustainable agriculture and energy solutions. The integration of AI into crop development represents a paradigm shift, allowing for faster innovation cycles and more resilient crop systems tailored to evolving environmental and market demands. Resilience vs. Input Dependency Casterra highlights low-input cultivation—does this position castor as a more resilient crop in an era of volatile fertilizer and energy prices, and could that become its defining competitive advantage? Castor’s agronomic profile positions it as a highly resilient crop in an era marked by volatile input costs, including fertilizers, water, and energy. Unlike many conventional crops, castor can achieve stable yields with relatively low input requirements. It thrives across a wide range of climatic conditions and does not demand intensive irrigation or expensive chemical treatments. This low-input dependency not only reduces production costs but also minimizes exposure to market fluctuations in agricultural inputs. As sustainability becomes a central criterion in both agriculture and energy sectors, castor’s resilience and resource efficiency could emerge as its defining competitive advantages. These characteristics make it particularly suitable for cultivation in regions facing climate variability and resource constraints, further supporting its scalability as a biofuel feedstock. Commercialization Strategy With plans to expand in Brazil, what does a successful go-to-market strategy look like—are partnerships with local producers enough, or will vertical integration be necessary to control the value chain? Casterra’s commercialization strategy in Brazil is built on a collaborative ecosystem rather than a vertically integrated model. The company focuses on providing advanced genetics and agronomic know-how while partnering with local farmers and oil crushers to build a robust supply chain. Farmers play a critical role in scaling cultivation, while crushers act as off-takers, ensuring market linkage and processing capacity. This distributed model allows for rapid expansion without the capital intensity associated with full vertical integration. By fostering strong partnerships across the value chain, Casterra can leverage local expertise, infrastructure, and networks to accelerate adoption. The strategy emphasizes scalability, flexibility, and shared value creation, which are essential for establishing a sustainable and competitive castor oil industry in Brazil and beyond. Future of Bio-Based Economies Looking ahead a decade, do you see castor oil primarily as a biofuel feedstock, or as part of a broader shift toward bio-based industrial systems where energy, materials, and chemicals converge? Looking ahead, the role of castor oil is likely to extend far beyond biofuels, becoming a key component in a broader bio-based industrial ecosystem. As production scales and costs decline, castor oil could serve as a versatile feedstock for a wide range of applications, including bio-based chemicals, advanced materials, lubricants, and specialty polymers. This convergence of energy, materials, and chemicals reflects a larger transition toward integrated bio-based economies, where renewable biological resources replace fossil-based inputs across multiple industries. If castor achieves the envisioned scale and cost efficiency, it has the potential to become a foundational crop in this transformation, supporting sustainable industrial growth while reducing environmental impact. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3699/turning-bamboo-into-business-scaling-green-livelihoods-across-india.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3699/turning-bamboo-into-business-scaling-green-livelihoods-across-india.html Fri, 17 Apr 2026 13:39:29 +0530 Neju George Abraham shares how Industree Foundation is building globally competitive, climate-positive supply chains In an exclusive interaction with AgroSpectrum, Neju George Abraham, CEO of Industree Foundation, outlines a bold vision for scaling women-led, climate-resilient livelihoods through nature-based value chains. He emphasizes that women are not beneficiaries but central economic actors, driving both sustainability and commercial viability in sectors such as bamboo and natural fibres. Drawing on two decades of experience, Abraham highlights how structured, traceable supply chains and producer-owned enterprises are unlocking market access while delivering measurable environmental and social impact. He also underscores persistent gaps in climate finance, market pricing, and policy implementation that continue to limit the full potential of these enterprises. Looking ahead, he positions women-led, nature-based enterprises as core infrastructure for India’s climate and economic future, rather than a niche sustainability solution. You often speak about building “green livelihoods at scale.” What’s the business case for putting women at the centre of climate-resilient, nature-based value chains - and is the market finally ready to price that value correctly? At Industree, we see women not as beneficiaries but as central economic actors in building climate-resilient, nature-based value chains that respond to a growing global market for sustainable materials. Women already form the backbone of agriculture and forest-based livelihoods across rural India. When they are organised into producer collectives and connected directly to markets, they drive both productivity and long-term sustainability. Over the past two decades, the Industree Foundation ecosystem has demonstrated that inclusive and climate-positive value chains can also be commercially viable. Our work has impacted more than 600,000 lives and enabled nearly $ 60 million in cumulative market access for rural producers. These value chains focus on regenerative materials such as bamboo and other natural fibres that align ecological restoration with stable income generation. The market for nature-based products already exists and continues to grow as industries seek alternatives to carbon-intensive materials like plastic, steel, and conventional timber. The challenge is not demand but building supply chains that connect rural producers to that demand efficiently and fairly. Industree’s approach focuses on creating end-to-end, traceable value chains that link farmers and producers directly to buyers without multiple layers of intermediaries. By organising women into producer collectives and enterprises, and providing support in skills, aggregation, processing, and market access, we help ensure that a greater share of the value flows back to the communities that create it. An example of this model is GreenKraft Producer Company Ltd, a 100 per cent women-owned enterprise incubated by Industree that works with natural fibres such as bamboo, sal/siali and banana bark. By integrating rural producers into formal supply chains and connecting them with national and global markets, such enterprises demonstrate how climate-resilient, nature-based value chains can generate both environmental and economic value. While global markets are increasingly valuing responsibly sourced materials, this recognition has yet to translate into consistent and equitable price premiums for producers, with smallholder farmers and rural enterprises continuing to capture only a limited share of the added value. This underscores the need for stronger market mechanisms that reward sustainability more fairly and reliably. Scaling these models will require sustained investment in traceable supply chains, farmer collectives, and direct market linkages, enabling women producers to capture the full economic value of the growing demand for nature-based products. Climate adaptation is now a boardroom issue. How do you translate abstract climate risk into tangible income security for rural women producers on the ground? Climate adaptation becomes meaningful for rural communities when it delivers stable livelihoods and predictable income, particularly in regions where rainfall-dependent agriculture makes households highly vulnerable to climate shocks, often leading to income loss and migration. Addressing this requires shifting from input-intensive crops to resilient agroforestry systems. At Industree Foundation, this begins with enabling the cultivation of climate-resilient resources like bamboo on degraded or fallow land, restoring ecosystems while creating a long-term, low-input income stream that can last 40–45 years without displacing food crops. To convert this into sustained income, Industree builds structured, market-aligned value chains by aggregating women farmers into producer collectives and equipping them with training, tools, and machinery for primary processing and enterprise management. This is complemented by decentralised processing, adherence to quality and certification standards, and integration with direct market linkages that reduce intermediaries and improve price realisation. Industree also enables smallholder women farmers to acquire international certifications such as the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certification, which serve as a gateway to high-value markets by ensuring that bamboo is sustainably grown, legally compliant, and fully traceable across global supply chains. Through this end-to-end ecosystem spanning cultivation, skilling, processing, certification, and market access, Industree translates climate resilience into dignified, stable jobs, enabling women-led producer enterprises that are economically viable and embedded within regenerative, globally connected value chains. Nature-based enterprises are often seen as artisanal and small-scale. What will it take to make them competitive with industrial supply chains - without compromising ecological integrity? Nature-based enterprises are often perceived as artisanal or small-scale, not because of limited potential but due to fragmented value chains. To compete with industrial supply systems, these enterprises must be structured as end-to-end value chains that integrate production, aggregation, quality assurance, certification, and market access. At Industree Foundation, the focus has been on building traceable and certified supply chains that meet global standards while maintaining ecological integrity. Certification plays a crucial role in enabling access to higher-value markets. Alongside Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification for responsibly sourced bamboo, producer enterprises within the Industree ecosystem also align with global compliance frameworks such as SMETA and other international quality and ethical sourcing standards. These certifications help ensure transparency, responsible production practices, and credibility with global buyers. Equally important is the producer organisation. Industree has supported the incubation of 32 producer collectives and 12 farmer-producer organisations, demonstrating that scale becomes possible when rural producers are organised into structured enterprises. Through these institutions, producers are able to aggregate supply, maintain consistent quality, and participate in formal markets. Ultimately, competitiveness comes from combining institutional partnerships, certification, market alignment, and organised producer networks. When these elements are integrated, nature-based enterprises can operate at scale, access global markets, and remain both economically viable and environmentally responsible. Access to capital remains a bottleneck. Why do women-led, climate-positive enterprises still struggle to attract mainstream investment, and what needs to shift in the impact and climate finance ecosystem? Women-led, climate-positive enterprises often operate in sectors with long gestation periods and distributed production systems, which do not align with traditional investment expectations. These models require collective ownership, livelihood security, and ecological outcomes, which are not always captured in conventional financial metrics. At Industree, we work with a mix of public programmes, CSR, and impact capital to enable enterprise growth. There is a need for financial models that recognise blended value with economic, social, and environmental returns. As nature-based industries scale, they must be recognised as viable economic sectors. Unlocking capital will require patient financing, risk-sharing mechanisms, and stronger market linkages. Producer ownership is central to your model. In a world obsessed with hyper-growth and exits, how do you defend collective ownership as a scalable and investable structure? While the broader business ecosystem often prioritises hyper-growth and rapid exits, rural enterprises require a different lens, where sustainable scale is built through strong institutions, organised producer groups, and long-term market linkages. At Industree, the model is rooted in the belief that when women are entrusted with ownership, they build more resilient and enduring enterprises, drawing on their deep knowledge of local resources, production systems, and community networks. Over the past decade, government has invested in collective ownership models. We wish to leverage and build upon these in the rural sector. Collective ownership is central because it ensures that value remains within the community, with women producers transitioning from participants in value chains to owners and decision-makers. Through targeted capacity building, leadership development, and enterprise management training, they are equipped to run and govern their businesses, while external support gradually transitions to community ownership to ensure long-term sustainability. This approach redefines empowerment in economic terms, as women-led enterprises influence how resources are allocated, profits are reinvested, and opportunities are shared, often prioritising stability and collective welfare. Industree’s vision is to build networks of women-led collectives that are both commercially viable and socially transformative, where scale is defined not just by growth, but by deepened ownership, stronger leadership, and greater community resilience. Measurement drives markets. How do you quantify the dual return - economic empowerment for women and measurable environmental outcomes - in a way that resonates with global buyers and investors? At Industree Foundation, impact measurement is embedded within the business model to align social outcomes with market demand and investment. On the economic front, the organisation tracks indicators such as income enhancement, enterprise ownership, and market access, with more than 40,000 women trained and integrated into nature-based value chains. These systems ensure that rural producers are not only participants but also stakeholders in the enterprises they help build. Environmental metrics are equally important. Regenerative value chains such as bamboo cultivation enable measurable outcomes, including carbon sequestration, land restoration, and improved biodiversity. Certification frameworks such as Forest Stewardship Council certification strengthen these efforts by ensuring traceability and responsible sourcing across the supply chain. As global buyers increasingly prioritise transparency and sustainability, such verified systems help link environmental and social impact directly with market access. By aligning measurable outcomes with buyer expectations, nature-based enterprises can unlock stronger market opportunities while demonstrating long term ecological and economic value. Across all three value chains 94 per cent women reported there has been increase in new employment opportunities, 85 per cent reported improved competency and access to productive economic resources, 76 per cent women have reported their increased participation in family decision making. Policy ambition on climate is rising in India. Where do you see the biggest gap between national climate commitments and the lived realities of women working in forest and farm-based economies? India’s climate ambitions are significant, but the key gap lies in translating policy into viable livelihood opportunities for women in forest- and farm-based economies. While access to land and finance remains a challenge, the more critical constraint is the lack of reliable market linkages, which limits their ability to convert climate-positive production into stable income. This is further compounded by the absence of standardised certification and quality assurance systems, restricting access to higher-value domestic and export markets. Climate solutions may be framed at a national level, but their success depends on enabling women producers to participate competitively in markets. Bridging this gap requires stronger convergence between government systems, institutions, and industry players to ensure not just access to resources, but also robust market connect and certification frameworks. This is essential to making climate action both economically viable and truly inclusive. If you look 10 years ahead, do you see women-led, nature-based enterprises as a niche sustainability play, or as core infrastructure for India’s climate and economic future? Yes, over the next 10 years, women-led, nature-based enterprises will become core infrastructure for India’s climate and economic future, not a niche sustainability play. Industree’s work over the past two decades has consistently shown that these enterprises are inherently women-led, because they are rooted in locally available natural resources like bamboo and other fibres, and built on generations of knowledge that women already possess. What women need is structured early-stage support; with the right hand-holding through training, institution-building, and market access, they are able to take ownership, scale operations, and build stable, long-term income streams.bamboo and bana, and other Industree has demonstrated the scalability of this model by training over 40,000 women and integrating them into organised, market-linked value chains, where they transition from workers to enterprise leaders. Its “Lakhpati Didi” vision aligns with national priorities to enable rural women to achieve annual incomes of Rs 1 lakh and above through sustainable livelihoods, ensuring that income growth is both scalable and climate-resilient. Building on this momentum, Industree is partnering with State Rural Livelihood Missions (SRLMs) across India to empower one million women farmers across 500 collectives over the next five years, driving bamboo-based livelihoods at scale. As climate risks intensify, the alignment between women’s livelihoods and natural resource-based economies will only strengthen. These value chains not only offer long-term economic resilience, often sustaining incomes for decades, but also contribute to ecological restoration. The shift ahead is therefore structural, with climate action and enterprise development working hand in hand, positioning women-led, nature-based enterprises as a foundational pillar of India’s future growth. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3697/why-ease-of-doing-business-needs-bolstering.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3697/why-ease-of-doing-business-needs-bolstering.html Wed, 15 Apr 2026 13:27:31 +0530 India’s fertiliser sector is central to food security, farmer livelihoods, fiscal stability, and industrial growth. Yet, despite its strategic importance, it remains one of the most tightly regulated and policy-constrained industries—a paradox in an era where Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) drives economic reform.  While India has advanced digitisation, tax rationalisation, and regulatory simplification, fertilisers remain encumbered by legacy laws, price controls, fragmented licensing, and onerous compliance. The sector thus struggles to balance food security imperatives with outdated regulation. This analysis examines India’s fertiliser ecosystem through the prism of EoDB, identifies structural and regulatory bottlenecks and situates these challenges within the broader tapestry of national EoDB reforms championed by the Government of India. Fertilisers in India are more than industrial commodities—they underpin food security, crop yields, soil health, and farm incomes, shaping rural livelihoods and national stability. Despite national reforms aimed at EoDB, legacy controls persist, straining manufacturers and slowing innovation. Delays in subsidies, inverted taxes, and fragmented licensing increase working capital pressures, making expansion and technological upgrades difficult. In tightly regulated markets, regulatory unpredictability acts as an invisible tax on productivity. Dr Debashis Mandal, Head, Division of Soil Science & Agricultural Chemistry, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), frames the challenge sharply: the sector’s EoDB journey is not merely procedural—it is a strategic enabler of soil restoration and nutrient efficiency. “If crops demand nutrients and soils demand carbon, then policy must supply predictability,” he notes. “Timely, science-based approvals and transparent regulatory pathways are essential for translating innovations—such as organo-mineral complexes, slow-release formulations, and advanced nutrient delivery systems—into field-level impact. EoDB does not imply diluted standards; it means creating a facilitative, risk-based framework that accelerates responsible technologies, reduces cultivation costs, improves nutrient use efficiency, and ultimately restores balance between productivity and sustainability.” The urgency of improving nutrient efficiency is stark. In India, nitrogen use efficiency hovers at only 30–40 per cent, meaning up to 70 per cent of applied nitrogen is lost to volatilisation, leaching, or environmental pollution. Fertiliser subsidies total nearly Rs 2 lakh crore annually, with urea alone accounting for Rs 1.35 lakh crore. As Dr Monoranjan Mohanty, Director, ICAR-Indian Institute of Soil Science, Bhopal, explains, even a modest 10–15 per cent improvement in efficiency could save thousands of crores while enhancing soil health. Achieving this, he adds, requires biostimulants and biofertilisers to have clear, science-based regulatory pathways, predictable approval timelines, incentivised R&D, and a market where start-ups and MSMEs can operate without excessive compliance burdens, while quality standards encourage innovation rather than stifle it. Innovation should reach farmers’ fields without unnecessary delays. Dr P K Singh, Agriculture Commissioner, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, frames it as creating a predictable, science-driven ecosystem where micronutrients, bio-inputs, and balanced fertilisers move swiftly from laboratory to land. “When products reach farmers at the right time and cost, we strengthen soil health, enhance productivity, and build a resilient agricultural economy for a self-reliant India,” he says. Industry observers see a clear business case behind these reforms. Soumyak Biswas, Partner, BDO India Services Pvt Ltd, points out that the post-Budget policy environment signals a potential pivot from incremental tinkering to structural reform. “Regulatory simplification, digitised approvals, and reduced compliance friction can address long-standing industry challenges, lowering time-to-market and operational uncertainty,” he says. According to Biswas, a risk-based, trust-led regulatory framework, coupled with policy predictability and defined approval timelines, could unlock investment in specialty fertilisers, bio-inputs, and sustainable solutions. For smaller firms and start-ups, such clarity is not just a convenience—it is the difference between surviving and scaling in a capital-intensive sector.  Legacy Regulation and Economic Consequences At the heart of India’s fertiliser regulatory framework lies the Fertiliser Control Order (FCO), administered under the Essential Commodities Act of 1955. Designed in an era of scarcity and state-led planning, the FCO aimed to prevent hoarding, enforce quality standards, and ensure equitable distribution. Control, not competition, was its guiding principle. Six decades on, the same framework operates in a vastly different landscape—characterised by global trade, private-sector innovation, digital governance, and competitive manufacturing ecosystems. What was once protective has become a structural bottleneck. Manufacturers navigate multiple layers of licensing, state-wise product registrations, infrastructure stipulations, periodic renewals, and overlapping inspections. The absence of a harmonised “One Nation, One Licence” regime forces duplication across states, inflating costs, slowing time-to-market, and suppressing economies of scale. For start-ups and SMEs, the compliance burden can be prohibitive. Dr Rahul Mirchandani, Chairman & Managing Director, Aries Agro Ltd., underscores the potential of digitisation: “Ease of Doing Business in agri inputs is not about lowering standards — it is about removing duplication, strengthening transparency, and enabling innovation. I propose a transformative reform: the creation of a centralised digital data stack for agri input licensing. ‘One Nation, ‘One License’ will provide harmonised approvals, uniform quality standards, real-time compliance tracking, and seamless operations across states, benefiting start ups, MSMEs, research-driven companies, and ensuring farmers timely access to quality inputs.” Regulatory asymmetry between domestic production and imports exacerbates challenges. Imported fertilisers often face fewer operational frictions than domestically manufactured products, creating an uneven playing field that undermines self-reliance goals. Delayed approvals, evolving compliance interpretations, and working capital pressures constrain investment, slow capacity expansion, and shrink research pipelines for advanced nutrient technologies. As imports fill domestic gaps, exposure to global price volatility, geopolitical risks, and currency fluctuations grows. India allocates one of the world’s largest fertiliser subsidies, yet regulatory inefficiency limits domestic competitiveness. Modernising the FCO through digitised licensing, harmonised standards, and transparent, time-bound approvals is not a mere industry demand—it is central to strengthening domestic manufacturing, reducing import dependence, and ensuring that public subsidy expenditure delivers long-term structural resilience. Taxation, Subsidies and Structural Distortions If regulatory complexity forms one layer of challenge in India’s fertiliser sector, taxation and subsidy design form another—equally consequential, yet less visibly debated. Together, they shape commercial logic, influence nutrient consumption, and determine whether efficiency or distortion dominates the system. A persistent challenge is the inverted GST duty structure. In many cases, raw materials and key intermediates attract higher taxes than finished fertiliser products, locking up working capital in unutilised input tax credits. Refund cycles are slow and cumbersome, creating liquidity stress—particularly for small and mid-sized enterprises that lack the balance sheet strength of larger players. In a sector constrained by regulated margins, blocked capital is more than an accounting inconvenience; it is a growth bottleneck. The problem is compounded by non-uniform GST rates across fertiliser categories and allied inputs. Variations in classification and interpretation generate compliance ambiguities, inflate administrative overheads, and occasionally trigger disputes. Companies confront procedural complexity that dilutes managerial focus and increases transaction costs. EoDB demands simplicity and predictability—qualities only partially realised in the current tax environment. Subsidy architecture introduces a deeper structural distortion. Subsidies are indispensable in a country where farm incomes remain fragile and input affordability is politically sensitive. Yet their design significantly shapes farmer behaviour. Urea, excluded from the Nutrient-Based Subsidy (NBS) framework, is heavily subsidised and priced well below phosphatic and potassic fertilisers. The result: nutrient imbalance. Over-application of nitrogen and under-application of P&K has degraded soil health, lowered nutrient-use efficiency, and created long-term productivity challenges. Short-term affordability carries hidden agronomic and fiscal costs, with excessive nitrogen generating environmental externalities, from groundwater contamination to greenhouse gas emissions. Fiscal consequences are equally stark. Artificially low urea prices stimulate demand beyond agronomic recommendations, inflating subsidised volumes. Public expenditure absorbs the cost, yet efficiency suffers when price signals fail to reflect relative nutrient value. The Union Budget 2026-27 reflects these pressures. Anand Kulkarni, Director at Crisil Ratings, notes: “The Union Budget 2026-27 has allocated Rs 1.71 lakh crore for fertiliser subsidies, with Rs 1.17 lakh crore for urea and Rs 0.54 lakh crore for complex fertilisers. Allocation for complex fertilisers may face a 15–20 per cent shortfall due to sustained higher raw material and import costs, though government support is likely to ensure adequate supply.” S Sankarasubramanian, Chairman, Fertiliser Association of India and MD & CEO, Coromandel International Ltd., adds, “The allocations underline a steady commitment to domestic capability. Support for indigenous urea and P&K, alongside imported fertiliser support, reinforces supply security while maintaining farmer access. Customs duty rationalisation and addressing inverted GST structures help streamline costs, improve cash flows, and create a more predictable operating environment.” Moving Beyond Incrementalism Meaningful EoDB reform in India’s fertiliser sector cannot rely on piecemeal adjustments; it requires structural recalibration. At its core lies the FCO, conceived for scarcity management rather than competitive efficiency. Modernisation demands a shift from blanket administrative controls to risk-based, data-driven quality regulation. Encouraging domestic innovation is central. Jayakumar Jitendrasinh Rawal, Minister of Marketing and Protocol, Maharashtra, underscores the vision: “Food production has always been India’s greatest strength. By advancing progressive policies and ensuring EoDB in agri-inputs, we can build a resilient, globally competitive, and self-reliant agricultural system. The micro-fertiliser and nutrient industry has, over the past four decades, played a pivotal role in improving crop yield, quality, and productivity, positioning India among the world’s leading food producers. With strong support for MSME-driven industries and sustained investment in research, development, and innovation, we are committed to achieving global agricultural leadership by 2047.” Reform in fertilisers is not merely industrial adjustment—it is a strategic investment in India’s agricultural future. Structural recalibration, harmonised regulation, and innovation-led policy are essential to ensure efficiency, sustainability, and competitiveness advance hand in hand. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3692/carlo-boutton-on-advancing-precision-biologicals-in-crop-protection.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3692/carlo-boutton-on-advancing-precision-biologicals-in-crop-protection.html Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:48:51 +0530 In an exclusive Agrospectrum interview, Carlo Boutton highlights how AGROBODY technology is addressing resistance, scalability, and sustainability challenges in modern agriculture with support from Syngenta Carlo Boutton, interim CEO of Biotalys, highlights that transitioning from lab to field remains a key hurdle, particularly in scaling protein-based crop protection solutions while maintaining efficacy, safety, and cost efficiency. He notes that the company’s AGROBODY platform, developed in collaboration with Syngenta, reflects a broader industry shift toward integrating biologicals as a core pillar of future crop protection strategies rather than niche alternatives. Boutton emphasizes that while protein-based biocontrols offer novel modes of action and strong potential in resistance management, they will complement rather than fully replace chemical solutions within integrated pest management systems. He adds that long-term growth will depend on platform-driven innovation, regulatory support, and advances in scalable production to make sustainable biologicals both effective and affordable for farmers. Early lab success is encouraging, but the real test lies in field performance. What are the biggest scientific or operational hurdles you anticipate as you move from in vitro to in vivo and eventually to commercialization ? Syngenta and Biotalys will now test the novel active ingredients on living organisms and then evaluate results. Moving from in vitro to in vivo and ultimately to field development is always a critical transition point for any new crop protection technology. Operationally, scaling a novel protein-based active ingredient also requires ensuring manufacturing capabilities at commercial scale, while maintaining efficacy and safety. This is why Biotalys follows a staged development approach, combining laboratory screening with progressive in vivo validation and close collaboration with industrial partners that have deep expertise in strain engineering, precision fermentation, field development and commercialisation.  Your collaboration with Syngenta is a strong signal of industry alignment. What does this partnership reveal about how large incumbents are rethinking biologicals within their long-term crop protection strategies? The collaboration between Biotalys and Syngenta reflects a broader strategic shift among large incumbents toward integrating biologicals more deeply into future crop protection portfolios. Rather than viewing biologicals as niche or standalone alternatives, leading players are increasingly looking at platforms that can deliver differentiated modes of action, compatibility with existing practices, and scalability comparable to conventional solutions.  By combining Biotalys’ proprietary AGROBODY technology with Syngenta’s global development and market expertise, the collaboration aims to accelerate the translation of breakthrough biology into solutions that can be deployed at scale. This signals that biologicals are increasingly seen as a strategic pillar in addressing resistance management, regulatory pressure, and sustainability demands across major crop systems.  Biologicals have long struggled to match the consistency of synthetic chemistries. How does AGROBODY meaningfully shift that equation, and where do its limitations still remain? One of the historical challenges for biological crop protection products has been achieving consistency comparable to synthetic chemistries, particularly under variable environmental conditions. The AGROBODY platform of Biotalys is designed to address this by leveraging highly specific, antibody‑derived proteins that bind precisely to their biological targets. That is why we call these “precision biocontrols”, offering a clear and novel mode of action.  At the same time, Biotalys is transparent that protein-based solutions are not a one‑size‑fits‑all replacement for chemistry. Like any technology, AGROBODY‑based products must be optimized for formulation, application timing, and integration into broader spray rotation programs. Today, their greatest value lies in complementing existing tools, particularly where resistance or regulatory constraints limit chemical options, while offering a favourable safety and sustainability profile.  As resistance to conventional insecticides accelerates, do you see protein-based solutions becoming a primary line of defense, or will they remain complementary within integrated pest management systems? As resistance to conventional pesticides continues to accelerate, there is growing interest in protein-based solutions with novel modes of action as part of the resistance management toolbox. Biotalys sees these technologies as an increasingly important component of integrated pest management (IPM) programs.  In this respect, our first developed AGROBODY biocontrol, EVOCA, has been recognised as having a totally new mode of action by the Fungicide Resistance Action Committee (FRAC), a renown industry panel of scientists in the field. No resistance is known to our mode of action. This shows that our technology is able to develop novel and effective products that fit into the toolbox of growers.  Investors often question whether biologicals can deliver venture-scale returns. What is the commercial model that makes this platform not just viable, but scalable and profitable? Biotalys addresses this through a platform-driven business model rather than single‑product development. The AGROBODY technology enables the generation of multiple product candidates against different targets, allowing Biotalys to build a diversified pipeline and pursue partnerships that share development risk while expanding commercial reach.  Strategic collaborations, such as the one with Syngenta, provide non‑dilutive funding through milestones and potential royalties. Combined with advances in protein production and formulation, this approach is designed to support scalable, capital‑efficient growth. The objective is not only to bring differentiated products to market, but to do so in a way that can sustain long‑term value creation for both partners and investors.  With tightening global regulations on chemical pesticides, are policymakers moving fast enough to enable innovation, or is regulatory friction still a bottleneck for next-generation bioinsecticides? Globally, regulatory frameworks are evolving in response to the need for more sustainable crop protection solutions, but progress remains uneven. In some regions, policymakers are actively seeking to encourage innovation in biologicals, while in others, regulatory processes originally designed for chemical actives still slow down approval pathways for biological products.  Biotalys engages proactively with regulators to help ensure that protein-based biocontrols are assessed in a science‑based and proportionate manner. We are for exploring options for a fast-track procedure for biological products such as our AGROBODY biocontrols. Continued dialogue between innovators, regulators, and policymakers will be critical to unlocking the full potential of sustainable crop protection technologies.  The agri-inputs market is highly price sensitive. How do you plan to bridge the gap between sustainability and affordability without relying on premium positioning alone? Affordability is a central consideration in the agri‑inputs market, and sustainability alone is not sufficient to drive adoption. Biotalys’ strategy focuses on designing products that deliver clear agronomic value, such as efficacy against resistant pests or compatibility with spray rotation programs, while working toward cost‑competitive production at scale. Advances in strain engineering, precision-fermentation, and formulation are key levers in narrowing the cost gap between biologicals and conventional solutions.  Rather than relying solely on premium positioning, Biotalys aims to compete on total value delivered to the grower, including yield protection, resistance management, and regulatory robustness.  Looking ahead, does this milestone mark incremental progress, or are we at the early stages of a structural shift in how crop protection products are discovered, developed, and deployed? This first research milestone with Syngenta represents more than an isolated research success; it points to a broader evolution in how new, safe and effective crop protection products are discovered and developed. Technologies like the AGROBODY platform enable a more targeted approach to biocontrol discovery. That said, I expect the transformation of crop protection to be gradual. Chemistry, biologicals, and good agronomic practices will continue to coexist on the short term and will gradually evolve to a more biologics centered approach over time. Companies like Biotalys that are driving innovation are of critical importance to accelerate shaping the future of a sustainable agriculture.  --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3690/new-farm-engine-runs-on-data-not-diesel.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3690/new-farm-engine-runs-on-data-not-diesel.html Mon, 13 Apr 2026 12:42:49 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Simon Henry outlines how aerial intelligence is cutting inputs, boosting yields, and driving ESG outcomes Simon Henry, Vice President of Business Development – EMEA / Ireland at ZenaTech, outlines how precision agriculture is rapidly shifting from a niche innovation to a necessity across EMEA, driven by regulatory pressure, rising costs, and climate volatility. He emphasizes that ZenaTech’s Drone-as-a-Service model is breaking down cost and complexity barriers, making advanced aerial intelligence accessible to farms of all sizes. The company is tackling one of the sector’s biggest challenges—turning complex data into actionable insights—by embedding AI-driven analytics that deliver real-time, field-level decisions. Henry highlights how drone-led automation can significantly cut input waste, improve water efficiency, and boost profitability while aligning with sustainability and ESG goals. Looking ahead, he envisions a digitally integrated farming ecosystem powered by AI, predictive analytics, and emerging technologies, positioning drones as a critical support system rather than a replacement for farmers. Precision Agriculture at Scale ZenaTech’s drone solutions enable plant health monitoring, crop mapping, and early stress detection using multispectral imaging. How do you see precision agriculture evolving from a niche technology to a mainstream farming necessity across EMEA markets? In the EMEA region, precision agriculture is already considered a structural necessity, rather than a luxury, in many regions. This has been driven by increasingly rigorous EU mandates, rising input costs, and fluctuating supply markets. The reason this may not be illustrated in practice is because mainstream adoption has been hindered by the high cost of entry and technical complexity required by many solutions currently on the market.  ZenaTech is bridging this gap through our Drone as a Service (DaaS) model. By building precision agriculture as a scalable utility, we enable farmers to meet strict targets and maximise their inputs without the burden of hardware ownership. As climate volatility increases, our real-time multispectral insights will provide the essential resilience needed to transform localized data into a universal standard for sustainable, high-yield farming. Harnessing this resilience will become crucial to safeguarding yields throughout the coming decades, as farms of all sizes and specialisms worldwide grapple with intensifying climate volatility. From Data to Decisions Your platforms generate high-resolution, real-time agricultural data. What are the biggest barriers farmers face in translating this data into actionable decisions, and how is ZenaTech addressing this gap? For most farmers, the primary barrier is the challenge of translating complex multispectral maps into practical field-level actions. Most platforms provide data that requires manual interpretation, creating a technical gap that stalls decision-making and in doing so, lessens impact. ZenaTech is focused on addressing this by integrating AI-powered analytics directly into our ZenaDrone ecosystem. Our software processes raw data into prescription maps that identify specific issues like nitrogen deficiency or pest outbreaks in real-time, cutting out the middleman entirely. By providing actionable insights and ensuring our software platform integrates with existing farm management systems, we turn aerial intelligence into a practical tool for increasing crop yields and operational efficiency. This allows farmers to make better, faster decisions with confidence,  based on our data-based insights. Drone-as-a-Service (DaaS) vs Ownership Models ZenaTech’s DaaS model removes the need for upfront drone investment. How disruptive is this model for traditional agri-tech adoption, especially among small and mid-sized farms? DaaS model is cutting-edge in innovating legacy and low-tech processes. Historically, precision agriculture required six-figure investments in hardware, specialized pilot training, and complex regulatory compliance. As a result, the largest industrial farms could avail of this technology. By removing the capital expenditure wall and supporting users with a skilled DaaS consultant who provides in-person setup and ongoing customer support tailored to clients' needs, we have democratized access through our drone technology. Small and mid-sized farmers can now access advanced multispectral imaging and precision spraying through a manageable, predictable operational expense. We also manage the technical overhead, including AI data processing and flight certifications, to ensure farmers are provided with actionable insights without the need for deep technical knowledge on their end. This pay-per-use flexibility ensures that cutting-edge aerial intelligence is no longer a luxury but an accessible tool for increasing profit and enhancing sustainability across the entire agricultural spectrum. AI, Automation & Farm Economics With AI-driven plant counting, disease detection, and yield optimization, how significantly can drone-led automation reduce input costs and improve farm profitability in real terms? Crucially, our drone technology has the capacity to eliminate the need to "blanket spray” fertilizer, which is a traditional approach that wastes a substantial amount of chemical input for the average farmer annually, while also stifling their ability to meet key sustainable targets. Instead, our multispectral drone imaging enables precise, variable-rate application, reducing fertilizer and pesticide costs. By moving operations to the air, we also have the capacity to eliminate soil compaction caused by heavy machinery, which can improve yields significantly. Meanwhile, our disease and pest detection software helps to mitigate unforeseen risks, ensuring farmers can maximise yield from their inputs. Ultimately, Zenatech’s Drone as a Service model replaces high-risk investments with a “pay-per-use” service that slashes labour, input waste, and mitigates profit lost through avoidable risks, ensuring precision agriculture is the most profitable path for any modern farm. Water & Climate Intelligence Given increasing climate stress and water scarcity, how can drone-based 3D mapping and irrigation analytics reshape water-use efficiency in agriculture? We tackle this in a similar way to how we effectively manage fertilizer use; through the insights provided by our drone-based 3D mapping, we replace broad irrigation tactics with 3D-driven precision irrigation. Through our ZenaDrone technology, we create high-resolution topographic maps that reveal exactly how water moves across a field, identifying drainage issues and high-risk drought zones. Complementing this, our multispectral and thermal sensors detect crop water stress in real time, allowing for localized, variable-rate irrigation. By targeting only the areas in need, farmers can significantly reduce water (and energy waste) while maintaining optimal plant hydration. Through our DaaS model, this high-level irrigation intelligence becomes an affordable necessity for every kind of farm navigating the challenges of global water scarcity. Integration with Broader Agri-Tech Ecosystems How does ZenaTech envision integrating drone data with farm management systems, satellite analytics, and IoT platforms to create a unified “digital farm” ecosystem? In ZenaTech’s vision for a unified “digital farm” ecosystem, ZenaDrone serves as the primary engine for real-time intelligence. We integrate aerial data with IoT ground sensors and satellite analytics via our Enterprise SaaS platform, creating a single source of truth for farmers to refer to. By using open APIs, our AI-driven insights flow directly into existing farm management systems and smart machinery, enabling automated, variable-rate applications. This seamless integration (supported by our upcoming quantum-enhanced processing) transforms fragmented data points into a cohesive, predictive toolset, allowing farmers to optimize every acre with unprecedented speed and precision. Regulatory & Airspace Challenges in EMEA Drone deployment in agriculture is often constrained by regulatory frameworks. What are the key policy bottlenecks across Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, and how can they be streamlined to unlock scale? As with any set of tech-focused regulatory frameworks, this is an ongoing conversation across many jurisdictions. Specifically, governments around the world have placed a focus on developing regulatory frameworks for the new world of drones for a number of years already, with the aim of opening airspace to enable businesses to use this technology. The good news is that ZenaTech’s DaaS model is specifically designed to manage these considerations on behalf of the end-user. Rather than forcing farmers to carry the regulatory burden, we can offer Drone as a Service as an end-to-end solution, controlling all aspects of the drone analytics process from hardware, software, and AI-driven analytics to operational flight services. This gives farmers peace of mind that the regulatory aspect of our operation is compliant within the areas we service. Sustainability & ESG Alignment With increasing focus on carbon footprint and sustainable farming, how can drone-enabled agriculture contribute to measurable ESG outcomes for farmers, agribusinesses, and investors? On the environmental side, our ZenaDrone technology enables a significant reduction in chemical inputs through precision variable-rate spraying, which directly lowers nitrous oxide emissions and prevents nitrogen run-off. By replacing heavy, diesel-burning tractors with autonomous aerial systems, we also eliminate soil compaction, which restores soil health and improves carbon sequestration, while reducing the farm’s overall footprint. From a monitoring and governance perspective, our integrated Enterprise SaaS platform provides an automated, immutable audit trail for every field action. This high-level transparency provides the comprehensive proof required for agribusinesses to validate sustainable practices, comply with the EU Green Deal, and secure green financing from ESG-focused investors. The Future: Autonomous Farming Systems Looking ahead to 2030, do you see agriculture moving toward fully autonomous, drone-led farm management systems? What role will AI, predictive analytics, and possibly quantum computing play in that transition? Our Drone-as-a-Service model is not engineered to realize a fully autonomous, drone-led farm management system but to permanently alleviate the time, environmental, and safety burdens associated with traditional management systems from farmers, while boosting their confidence to make more informed strategic decisions. We recognize the many plates that the modern farmer has to spin, from business strategy to supply chain management to everyday risk management and execution. We want to position ourselves as supporting staff, easing the day-to-day burden for farmers by providing them with detailed, actionable insights, specific to their operation, thereby enhancing their decision-making, without requiring extra elbow work. By 2030, we want to be facilitating as many farmers as possible to leverage the benefits of AI, predictive analytics, and quantum computing in their everyday practice to enhance sustainability, mitigate risk, reduce costs, and increase yield, while lessening their workload. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3686/ai-based-tools-can-help-farmers-and-policymakers-interpret-uncertainty-and-environmental-variability-more-effectively-microsoft.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3686/ai-based-tools-can-help-farmers-and-policymakers-interpret-uncertainty-and-environmental-variability-more-effectively-microsoft.html Fri, 10 Apr 2026 15:25:35 +0530 Human oversight and contextual intelligence key to scaling AI in agriculture In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Maj Sapna Nauhria, Industry Director, Public Sector, Asia, Microsoft, highlights that AI’s real value in agriculture lies in bridging policy intent with field realities by enabling data-driven, context-specific decisions while respecting ecological limits. She emphasises that for initiatives like the Digital Agriculture Mission to succeed, advisories must be localised, transparent, and directly linked to on-ground factors such as water availability and infrastructure. The discussion underscores that AI should complement—not replace—farmer judgment, with trust built through explainable recommendations, human oversight, and integration of local knowledge systems. Looking ahead to 2026, she notes that success will be reflected in behavioural shifts such as condition-based farming, reduced risk, and improved input efficiency, rather than just an increase in digital advisories or policy outputs. Spending vs. Soil Reality India’s agri budgets have expanded significantly, yet agriculture ultimately responds to soil health, water availability, and climate variability. Where can AI genuinely bridge the gap between fiscal intent and biological constraints—and where can it not ? AI as an Enabler Within Ecological Realities India’s expanding agricultural budgets reflect strong fiscal commitment, and agricultural outcomes are dependent on combination of  technological tools and natural factors such as soil health, water availability, and climate variability.  AI‑enabled tools can help support more informed decisions related to timing, targeting, and resource use. By integrating weather forecasts, soil information, and crop growth models, AI based systems may generate indicative insights such as potential input needs, irrigation timing considerations, or early signals of pest or crop stage conditions. AI generated insights may help identify situations where adjusting input use could be beneficial and may help institutions better understand regional variability in climate related risks. In this way, AI can serve as an information layer that helps relate policy objectives to observed field conditions.‑based systems may generate indicative insights such as potential input needs, irrigation timing considerations, or early signals of pest or crop‑stage conditions‑generated insights may help identify situations where adjusting input use could be beneficial and may help institutions better understand regional variability in climate‑related risks. AI based tools can support more frequent monitoring of crop conditions and soil variability. Continuous monitoring of crop response, soil moisture, and variability across regions can help institutions understand which interventions are working and where natural constraints are limiting the progress. These insights may help institutions consider adjustments during the season based on observed patterns.‑based tools can support more frequent monitoring of crop conditions and soil variability Ongoing efforts to enhance soil health and address challenges related to cropping decisions remain essential. AI‑based tools can help farmers and policymakers interpret uncertainty and environmental variability more effectively. The value of AI based tools lies in helping ensure that decisions are informed by local ecological and contextual factors. When used within natural constraints, these tools can help support decision making in ways that align with field realities. ‑based tools lies in helping ensure that decisions are informed by local ecological and contextual factors. When used within natural constraints, these tools can help support decision‑making in ways that align with field realities Digital Agriculture Mission and the Farm Itself The Digital Agriculture Mission promises registries, advisories, and digital execution. From a farmer’s standpoint, what must change on the ground for this to move from dashboards to day-to-day agronomic decisions ? India’s Digital Agriculture Mission (DAM) aims to provide digital infrastructure that can help support more informed agronomic decision making. From a farmer standpoint, the expected changes on ground are:‑making. First, consideration is ensuring advisories are timely, locally relevant, and practical for farmers to use.Farmers may benefit from advisories that reflect localized factors—such as indicative sowing windows, potential irrigation considerations based on weather forecasts, or signals related to crop stages. A digital system gains significance only when it is grounded in data relevant to specific farm and a farmer can authenticate and engage with it. Without such contextual detail, digital systems may primarily support administrative processes rather than day‑to‑day agronomic decision‑making. Second, farmer data must translate into tangible benefits: Farmers share information about their land and crops, and ensuring that this information connects to clear and understandable insights may help strengthen the practical value of digital agriculture tools. For digital agriculture to influence decisions, farmers must see practical benefits, such as greater clarity on changing conditions or potential risks. In agriculture, transparency is critical, advisories should be simple, in native language and explain why a recommendation has changed and which risk it aims to mitigate. Trust grows when farmers can connect their data to practical outcomes. Third, Phygital systems grounded in physical realities, especially water. Farmers may benefit from advisories if they are closely linked with the on-ground resources and infrastructure, such as irrigation schedules, canal releases, and electricity supply. Advisories tend to be more relevant when they consider the on ground context—such as water availability or local infrastructure—along with technological inputs.‑ground context—such as water availability or local infrastructure—along with technological inputs. Digital agriculture efforts might be most valuable when information is simple, clear, and tailored to farmers’ local needs. Climate Volatility as an Agronomic ProblemClimate risk is often framed in financial or insurance terms. How can AI help farmers make better in-season agronomic choices—crop selection, planting windows, irrigation, and input timing—under rising climate uncertainty ? Rising climate variability—such as shifts in rainfall, temperature, and pest pressures—can require farmers to make more frequent in season decisions.AI based tools may support this shift by offering data informed insights that complement traditional knowledge and assist with more adaptive planning.‑season decisions.‑based tools may support this shift by offering data‑informed insights that complement traditional knowledge and assist with more adaptive planning. For crop and variety considerations, AI based systems can use weather outlooks, soil information, and historical patterns to present scenarios or options that reflect different levels of potential risk. These scenarios may help farmers weigh different considerations under uncertain seasonal conditions.‑based systems can use weather outlooks, soil information, and historical patterns to present scenarios or options that reflect different levels of potential risk. In planting decisions, AI supported tools may highlight short time windows that align with factors such as soil moisture or forecasted conditions. By considering factors such as soil moisture, temperature, and short term rainfall forecasts, these tools can provide farmers with information relevant to sowing decisions, which are often sensitive to climatic shifts‑supported tools may highlight short time‑windows that align with factors such as soil moisture or forecasted conditions.‑term rainfall forecasts, these tools can provide farmers with information relevant to sowing decisions, which are often sensitive to climatic shifts For irrigation, AI enabled models may help identify conditions associated with potential water stress by using inputs such as weather forecasts and evapotranspiration estimates. These insights may support farmers in considering irrigation timing within their local context and available resources.‑enabled models may In input and crop protection timing, AI based tools may provide information on how evolving conditions could influence timing considerations. These advisories may highlight situations where certain conditions could influence decisions about input timing.‑protection timing‑based tools may provide information on how evolving conditions could influence timing considerations. Crucially, AI does not replace farmer judgment. Its value lies in updating recommendations as conditions shift, communicating risks transparently, and supporting informed human decisions. AI supported tools can serve as one source of information as farmers navigate uncertainty during the season.‑supported tools can serve as one source of information as farmers navigate uncertainty during the season Precision Without ExclusionAdvanced AI performs best where data density is high, yet most Indian farms operate with sparse digital inputs. How can AI systems deliver agronomic precision without marginalising smallholders or rain-fed regions ? If AI tools are designed only for highly instrumented environments, they may be less applicable across diverse agricultural settings. Supporting broader applicability may involve designing AI systems that can work with low signal, high‑signal, highvariability‑variability environments. One approach involves moving from precision dependent on dense datasets toward approaches that use inference. Data sources such as satellite imagery, local weather information, soil reports, and general crop patterns—combined with local ground truthing—can help generate context relevant insights, even where long term sensor datasets are limited.‑truthing—can help generate context‑relevant insights, even where long‑term sensor datasets are limited. Another consideration is the value of presenting ranges of potential outcomes rather than single point predictions. For smallholders managing climate variability, guidance that illustrates relative scenarios may be more relatable in uncertain conditions. Presenting confidence ranges, trade offs, or scenario based options may help farmers understand how advice relates to their own resources and conditions‑point predictions.‑offs, or scenario‑based options may help farmers understand how advice relates to their own resources and conditions Further, Human and community knowledge can serve as valuable complementary inputs alongside digital data. Farmer observations, extension workers’ insights, and local cropping practices may provide useful context signals for AI models, particularly in rainfed or ‑fed or mixed‑cropping systems with diverse patterns. Incorporating lightweight feedback mechanisms may help adjust model outputs to better reflect local conditions. Developing AI systems that account for variability, data gaps, and uncertainty—and that remain adaptable—may help support more inclusive use across diverse farm environments. When AI systems are designed to work with sparse signals and incorporate human context, they may support decision making‑making across both irrigated and rainfed areas‑fed areas. Trust at the Farm GateFarmers remain wary of AI recommendations that are statistically sound but agronomically implausible for their fields. What design principles are essential for AI systems to earn trust in high-stakes decisions like fertiliser application or irrigation scheduling ? Experience in many settings suggests that farmers may take time to adopt new technologies. Adoption may depend on factors such as confidence in the technology and the presence of locally validated examples that feel relevant to farmers. The following considerations may help support farmer confidence in AI based tools:‑based tools Recommendations may be more meaningful when they reflect local agronomic context alongside statistical analysis. AI enabled‑enabled tools may be more useful when they incorporate information such as crop stage, soil conditions, water availability, and micro‑climate patterns. Models that do not align with on ground‑ground realities may be perceived as less relevant by some farmers. Communicating ranges, potential risks, and the reasoning behind recommendations may help farmers interpret the information in context. Explaining the uncertainty behind a recommendation may help farmers better understand the information being provided. Some systems may use approaches such as risk levels, confidence ranges, or trade-offs to illustrate potential scenarios. This type of framing may help farmers interpret recommendations in the context of their own constraints.‑offs to illustrate potential scenarios Human and community insights can serve as valuable contextual inputs for AI supported tools. Extension officers, FPO leaders, and experienced farmers may help interpret local conditions that complement model outputs. Incorporating such feedback into the models may help align model outputs more closely with local context.‑supported tools Transparency about the basis for a recommendation may help support user understanding. Providing a clear rationale—for example, indicating which signals informed a recommendation—may help farmers understand why advice has changed. This reduces the perception of AI as a “black box” and supports better judgment.  AI supported tools can assist with information, but they do not replace farmer judgment or address underlying constraints such as water availability or long-term soil and climate conditions.‑based tools is also important‑supported tools can assist with information, but they do not replace farmer judgment or address underlying constraints such as water availability or long‑term soil and climate conditions. When AI supported tools incorporate transparency, local context, and practical considerations, they may better support informed decision-making. Trust may develop over time when systems provide information that aligns with farmers’ practical realities.‑supported tools incorporate transparency, local context, and practical considerations, they may better support informed decision‑making. Microsoft’s Role in Agricultural InnovationMicrosoft has invested in cloud, AI, satellite analytics, and digital public infrastructure globally. Which Microsoft innovations or architectural approaches are proving most impactful in agriculture today—and what lessons have emerged from deploying them in complex, smallholder-dominated systems like India ? Microsoft works across cloud, AI, satellite analytics, and digital public infrastructure, and this digital foundation can support partners who are developing agriculture focused tools. In smallholder dominated environments, where diversity, data variability, and field level complexity are common, several approaches have been used by ecosystem participants, and a number of learnings have emerged.‑focused tools. In smallholder‑dominated environments, where diversity, data variability, and field‑level complexity are common, several approaches have been used by ecosystem participants, and a number of learnings have emerged Democratising AI through local language, accessible interfaces: Ecosystem partners use Microsoft’s cloud and AI tools to develop solutions that operate in regional languages and through familiar channels—such as mobile phones, messaging based assistants, or simple voice interfaces. These approaches may help make digital tools more accessible for farmers who prefer straightforward, commonly used formats.‑language, accessible interfaces‑based assistants, or simple voice interfaces. These approaches may help make digital tools more accessible for farmers who prefer straightforward, commonly used formats. Lesson: Solutions that align with familiar usage patterns may be easier for farmers to adopt Open, modular AI components that innovators can adapt: Publicly available components—such as models for weather, imagery processing, soil insights, or field level classification—can be adapted by startups, research institutions, and government organizations to address local crop, soil, and climate conditions. This type of modularity may help partners tailor tools to regional needs.‑level classification—can be adapted by startups, research institutions, and government organizations to address local crop, soil, and climate conditions. This type of modularity may help partners tailor tools to regional needs. Lesson: Local datasets and context specific adjustments may be important for AI tools designed for smallholder environments.‑specific adjustments may be important for AI tools designed for smallholder environments. Data platforms that integrate diverse agricultural signals: Agriculture involves multiple sources of information, including imagery, weather, soil data, farm records, markets, and community feedback. Microsoft’s data platforms can help partners integrate these streams, which they may use to build more context aware digital tools. This approach allows innovators to focus more on solution design and less on handling disparate data sources‑aware digital tools. This approach allows innovators to focus more on solution design and less on handling disparate data sources Lesson: Integrated datasets may be more useful for inclusive agritech solutions than simply increasing data volume. Partnerships grounded in local expertise: Solutions can benefit when digital infrastructure is combined with institutions that understand agronomy, local water systems, and community engagement—such as agricultural universities, extension networks, cooperatives, and FPOs. These partnerships may help ensure that digital systems are grounded in practical realities and aligned with local field conditions. Lesson: Human expertise can play an important role in supporting interpretation and credibility for AI‑supported tools. What these deployments have illustrated Across diverse smallholder settings, several observations have emerged: Use of familiar devices may support adoption. Simple, accessible channels can make digital advisories easier for farmers to engage with. Human capacity building remains important. Strengthening the skills of extension officers, FPO leaders, and intermediaries can complement technical development. ‑building remains important. Models may need to reflect local variability. Soil, water, and cropping diversity across India often requires region-specific data inputs ‑specific data inputs Alignment with public programs may support scale. Digital tools that complement existing government or ecosystem programs can reach more users. Feedback loops can help refine tools. Farmer observations and field level exceptions may help partners improve system relevance over time.‑level exceptions may help partners improve system relevance over time. In summary, Microsoft’s contribution to agriculture reflects an ecosystem oriented approach—providing cloud, AI, data, and interoperability foundations that partners, researchers, and institutions can use to create locally grounded solutions. Experience from India suggests that solutions can be more useful when they reflect field complexity, incorporate local knowledge, and remain adaptable to smallholder realities.‑oriented approach—providing cloud, AI, data, and interoperability foundations that partners, researchers, and institutions can use to create locally grounded solutions. Experience from India suggests that solutions can be more useful when they reflect field complexity, incorporate local knowledge, and remain adaptable to smallholder realities. From Advisory to AccountabilityAs AI increasingly informs advisories, subsidies, and even credit eligibility, where should human agronomic judgment remain non-negotiable—and how should accountability be structured when AI-guided decisions fall short ? Human judgment remains indispensable wherever biological variability, local feasibility, or livelihood risk is involved. AI can provide timely insights, highlight risks, and improve efficiency—but must remain a supporting tool, not the decision-maker. Accountability, meanwhile, should rest with the institutions deploying AI, backed by transparent explanations and human review pathways. When these safeguards are in place, AI can enhance trust, fairness, and resilience across India’s smallholder agriculture systems. The 2026 Reality CheckBy 2026, what visible changes at the field level would signal that AI, policy, and capital are finally aligned in Indian agriculture—and what would indicate the system is still optimising for policy optics rather than farm outcomes ? By 2026, alignment between AI, policy, and capital in Indian agriculture should be visible  in everyday field behaviour and reduced farmer risk. What alignment looks like on the ground Farmers move from calendar-based to condition-based decisions: Sowing will align with soil moisture and short-term forecasts, not fixed dates. Irrigation will target crop stress instead of set rotations. Input use, especially fertilisers and chemicals, will be more restrained, with farmers better informed about when and where not to apply them based on clear risk–benefit analyses. Farmers focus on avoiding losses, not just increasing yield: Farmers act early to reduce mid-season losses. In risky areas, they choose more diverse crops and faster-growing varieties, aiming for resilience instead of just higher productivity. Farmers trust advice and know the reason behind it. They understand why a suggestion changed during the season and what risk it helps avoids. When extension workers, cooperatives, and digital tools give the same message, it shows that AI, field teams, and policies are working as one. What misalignment looks like High volumes of advisories with low behavioural change: If advisory frequency rises but water use, input efficiency, or loss patterns look the same as before, the system is likely prioritising digital output rather than agronomic outcomes. Dashboards may appear successful even as farmers quietly revert to traditional instincts because the guidance is not grounded in feasibility. Uniformity where diversity should exist: If cropping recommendations and risk alerts look identical across districts with very different soils, rainfall, and water access, it suggests the system is optimising for administrative convenience—not biological reality. Similarly, if farmer feedback is collected but not reflected in subsequent advisory adjustments, digital participation becomes extractive rather than empowering. Expecting AI to compensate for structural constraints: If technology is positioned as a workaround for depleted aquifers, degraded soils, delayed irrigation releases, or weak extension systems, the gap between digital claims and field realities will widen. When AI is asked to solve challenges that are fundamentally ecological or infrastructural, trust inevitably erodes. To conclude, By 2026, true alignment will be visible when AI quietly enables farmers to make less risky decisions, more often, even in difficult seasons. Success will be measured in avoided losses, adaptive behaviour, and farmer confidence. If those behavioural signals emerge, it means AI, policy, and capital are  reinforcing each other. -- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3685/75-of-marine-protected-areas-hit-by-pollution-wake-up-call-for-global-conservation.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3685/75-of-marine-protected-areas-hit-by-pollution-wake-up-call-for-global-conservation.html Thu, 09 Apr 2026 13:12:19 +0530 Photo Credit: Michelangelo Pignani/FFI In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Dr. Amelia Wenger warns that global conservation efforts risk falling short as sewage pollution remains critically underfunded and poorly integrated into marine protection strategies In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Dr. Amelia Wenger, Water Pollution Program Lead at the Wildlife Conservation Society and Senior Research Fellow at the University of Queensland, highlighted that nearly 75 per cent of marine protected areas are impacted by sewage pollution, exposing a critical flaw in global ocean conservation strategies that overemphasize protection without addressing pollution. She stressed that while the “30 by 30” target is important, it risks prioritizing area coverage over actual biodiversity outcomes, especially as only a small fraction of ocean funding is directed toward pollution mitigation. Dr. Wenger explained that higher pollution levels within protected areas often stem from their proximity to densely populated, high-pressure zones, revealing gaps in integrated land-sea planning. The study underscores severe long-term ecological risks in tropical ecosystems, where wastewater pollution weakens coral reefs, seagrass, and mangroves while amplifying climate change impacts. She emphasized that effective conservation requires coordinated governance, increased investment in sanitation, and the use of advanced data and monitoring tools to tackle pollution alongside marine protection. Your study reveals that nearly 75 per cent of marine protected areas are affected by sewage pollution. What does this say about the current global approach to ocean conservation, and where is it fundamentally falling short? We can’t achieve the goals of the Global Biodiversity Framework without holistically addressing all the targets. That means that our push for “30 x 30” needs to be paired with tackling the threats that cannot be mitigated with protected areas, like pollution. Yet, according to a funding landscape report from Our Shared Seas, between 2015-2024, only 2.36 per cent of the global ocean funding went towards pollution. This means that we have a global threat to biodiversity – pollution – and we are significantly under resourcing our efforts to address it, which ultimately undermines our ability to achieve our marine biodiversity goals. One of the most striking findings is that pollution levels inside protected areas can be up to ten times higher than outside. How do you explain this paradox, and what systemic gaps does it expose? I think it highlights that in many cases, MPAs have been put in places where there were threats from fishing. And we know that the closer coral reefs are to populated areas, the more fishing pressure they experience. Our results reveal that these places are also experiencing greater pollution pressure too. We should still implement MPAs in places experiencing pollution, but we need our management activities to extend to efforts to reduce pollution too. I think our results expose that we are not systematically incorporating information about pollution into marine spatial planning or implementing integrated land-sea management.  The research highlights particularly severe impacts in coral reef and tropical regions. What are the long-term ecological consequences if wastewater pollution in these hotspots remains unaddressed? It has been demonstrated in multiple coral reef regions that wastewater pollution reduces coral growth rates and coral reproduction, while also making them more vulnerable to coral disease. It limits photosynthetic activity in seagrass meadows, and it makes mangrove forests more vulnerable to erosion. Most concerningly though is that it aggravates the impacts of climate change that they are already experiencing. Chronic nutrient loading heightens coral vulnerability to bleaching events and slows post-disturbance recovery. Mangroves also become more likely to die under nutrient enrichment conditions when facing drought caused by climate change. Altogether, these impacts undermine the structure, function, and long-term persistence of tropical coastal ecosystems, threatening their associated biodiversity and essential ecosystem services on which millions of people rely. And they will only get worse as climate change worsens. But this also means that we have a really important tool in our toolbox to increase the climate resilience of these ecosystems – pollution management! You’ve emphasized that marine protection alone cannot solve what is essentially a land-based problem. How should governments rethink the integration of land-use planning and ocean conservation policies? The land and sea are connected and yet, more often than not, the government departments that management sanitation, land-use planning, urban development, housing, and the environment are siloed. This means that it is very difficult to have cohesive and consistent policies to address this threat. Governments should: Utilize high-level coordinating mechanisms such as councils or committees within the centre of government or a government authority with policy coherence leadership. Establish clear mandates and responsibilities for departments in charge of sanitation services provision, environmental protection, and coordination with other institutions or the private sector. Encourage formal governance arrangements and informal mechanisms that facilitate communication and collaboration between government authorities and other governmental and non-governmental institutions. With the global “30 by 30” target gaining momentum, do you believe current commitments risk prioritizing quantity over quality when it comes to protected areas? Yes, I do. 30 x 30 is a mechanism to help deliver on biodiversity conservation, and a very important one. But there have been multiple studies that have demonstrated that MPAs are not effective when exposed to pollution.  So, I think we have gotten too focused on the 30 x 30 target and have lost sight of needing to also deliver on all the other targets in parallel to achieve our biodiversity conservation goals. The goal is biodiversity conservation, not MPA coverage, and I think that gets lost sometimes. The trends on where ocean funding has gone also demonstrate this – with protected areas and habitat protection receiving nearly a quarter of ocean funding between 2015-2024. From a policy and funding perspective, what are the biggest barriers to incorporating wastewater management into marine conservation strategies at scale? One is the siloed nature of government departments and policies, as I mentioned above, which means that the people who make policy decisions about sanitation are not the same as the people making policy decisions about marine conservation. The second is that delivering sanitation services is expensive and the sanitation sector faces major funding shortfalls. Because it is so expensive, there is often not the political will to invest in sanitation. But being able to link sanitation and marine conservation brings a new set of stakeholders like the tourism industry, fishers, recreational users of the ocean, who can all be champions and advocates for change and investment. The sewage crisis in the UK is a really interesting example of this.   Your study uses geospatial modeling to track nitrogen pollution. How can advancements in data and monitoring technologies improve accountability and decision-making for protected areas? Water quality monitoring can be complicated, and you need a lot of data to give you a realistic sense of what the levels of pollution are in a protected area. The more we can harness models and remote sensing and use those outputs in marine spatial planning exercises, the more we can assess the levels and impact of pollution on an MPA, and track improvements in pollution levels as we implement management actions on land. Beyond environmental damage, wastewater pollution has major public health and economic implications. How can policymakers better communicate these cross-sectoral risks to drive urgent action? I think it’s about selling the co-benefits that can come from addressing wastewater pollution and articulating how investment into sanitation improvements would compare to dealing with the public health, economic, and environmental issues separately. It’s also about knowing your audience and having tailored messaging about the myriad impacts that will resonate best with different audiences. If you had to identify one immediate, high-impact intervention that governments or global institutions could implement, what would it be to ensure marine protected areas actually deliver on their promise? Be clear on what is the biodiversity being protected in an MPA, identify the other threats facing it that will not be fixed with an MPA, and develop and implement strategies to address them. -- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3683/fueling-future-suhas-baxi-on-making-indias-bioenergy-model-economically-viable.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3683/fueling-future-suhas-baxi-on-making-indias-bioenergy-model-economically-viable.html Wed, 08 Apr 2026 13:52:19 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, BiofuelCircle’s Co-Founder and Group CEO outlines how scalable biomass supply chains, rural enterprises, and fuel substitution can transform agricultural waste into a sustainable energy solution without long-term subsidy dependence. In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Suhas Baxi, Co-Founder and Group CEO of BiofuelCircle, unpacks the real economics behind the “farm to fuel to soil” model and its path to self-sustainability. He highlights how scalable bioenergy systems can move beyond subsidy dependence by building efficient biomass supply chains and competitive pricing. The conversation dives into the rise of rural micro-entrepreneurship, revealing early profitability trends across biomass banks and their growing impact on local economies. Baxi also addresses critical risks, from feedstock volatility to environmental trade-offs, while explaining how digital marketplaces and data-led planning are reshaping the sector. Ultimately, he positions fuel substitution as the single most powerful metric proving that bioenergy can play a meaningful role in India’s energy transition. The “farm to fuel to soil” model promises a closed loop system where agricultural waste becomes energy and bio residue returns to farmland. Is this economically self sustaining at scale, or does it remain subsidy dependent in most markets? The farm to fuel to soil approach can achieve economic self-sufficiency when scaled effectively. Incentives and subsidies should ideally act as catalysts to accelerate adoption rather than long-term dependencies. As with most infrastructure-led sectors, bioenergy ventures typically operate on a three-to-five-year payback cycle, where early policy support helps unlock capital and drive momentum. However, reliance on continuous subsidies signals an inherent weakness in the model. Our focus is on developing supply chains and operational efficiencies that enable bioenergy products to compete with conventional fuels on price. This ensures long-term viability independent of policy support. A key enabler is building dependable biomass aggregation and logistics networks, ensuring consistent feedstock availability at stable and predictable costs for both producers and end users. You describe the model as a catalyst for rural micro entrepreneurship. How many of these enterprises are truly profitable without grant capital and what does survival data tell us about long term viability? At BiofuelCircle, each biomass bank is structured as a standalone rural enterprise operating on sound commercial fundamentals. Typically, these units require an investment of around Rs 3 crore and generate annual revenues of approximately Rs 3 to Rs 4 crore. Over the past three years, we have established close to 70 such biomass banks, forming a robust rural enterprise network within the biomass value chain. The earliest batch of around ten units has already reached profitability, while the next set of about twenty-five is steadily moving in that direction. Current trends indicate that most units turn EBITDA positive within 12 to 18 months and recover capital investment within three to four years. While none have yet completed a full lifecycle, early performance signals are encouraging, pointing to a viable and scalable rural enterprise model. In addition to financial returns, these ventures generate employment and formalise markets for agricultural residues. From an energy security perspective, can decentralized bioenergy realistically de risk national supply chains, or is its contribution still marginal compared to fossil infrastructure? Decentralised bioenergy should be seen as a complementary pillar within the broader energy mix, rather than a replacement for fossil fuels. Even with optimal utilisation of biomass resources, it is likely to meet around 10 to 12 percent of national energy demand in the medium term, particularly as overall consumption continues to grow. That said, its role in strengthening energy security is significant. By reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels and diversifying energy sources, bioenergy contributes to greater resilience. When combined with renewables like solar and wind, it enhances supply stability. In India, this shift is already underway, with initiatives such as ethanol blending and increasing adoption of compressed biogas across mobility and industrial sectors. Feedstock aggregation is often the weakest link in bio circular systems. How do you prevent supply fragmentation, seasonal volatility and price distortions in agricultural residue markets? The challenge of fragmentation can be addressed by treating biomass as part of an organised, nationwide market rather than isolated local supply chains. Strong supply systems require visibility into demand and supply, transparent pricing mechanisms, stable market signals and clearly defined quality benchmarks. At BiofuelCircle, we are building this ecosystem through a digital biomass marketplace that connects farmers, aggregators and industrial buyers on a unified platform. This enables transparent price discovery, structured transactions and data-led supply planning, which together help reduce volatility and improve reliability. Additionally, we leverage GIS and GPS based intelligence to map crop patterns, farmland and residue availability, enabling more efficient planning of aggregation and logistics infrastructure. Carbon credits and sustainability premiums are often cited as revenue boosters. If carbon markets soften or compliance rules tighten, does the circular model still hold up financially? Carbon credits and sustainability incentives should be viewed as supplementary gains rather than the core foundation of the business. Overdependence on such mechanisms introduces uncertainty and weakens the economic structure. Our approach is to ensure that bioenergy products are cost competitive with traditional fuels through efficient supply chains and operations. When this baseline is achieved, the business remains financially sound on its own merit. Carbon credits and similar incentives then serve as an added advantage, rewarding environmental impact, but not determining viability. The primary focus remains on building a resilient and efficient biomass ecosystem that supports large-scale adoption. What are the hidden risks such as methane leakage, soil nutrient imbalance, or over extraction of biomass that could undermine the environmental case for a closed loop system? The sustainability of the circular model depends on staying aligned with its core principle, which is utilising agricultural residue and waste rather than cultivating dedicated energy crops. When biomass is sourced from existing waste streams, the environmental benefits remain intact, as it prevents open burning and adds value to otherwise unused material. However, shifting toward purpose-grown energy crops could alter this balance by diverting land, water and other resources away from food production. Maintaining a clear distinction between waste utilisation and crop cultivation is therefore essential to preserving environmental integrity and ensuring that bioenergy remains a responsible waste-to-energy solution. Institutionally, who owns the value chain: farmers, cooperatives, private processors, or energy majors? And how does governance determine whether wealth is retained locally or extracted upward? The bioenergy value chain is inherently collaborative, involving multiple stakeholders rather than being controlled by a single entity. Farmers provide the raw biomass, local enterprises handle aggregation and processing, technology players enable conversion, and industries consume the final energy output. Ownership structures can differ across segments, ranging from cooperatives to private companies and large industrial players. What matters most is building an ecosystem where value creation and distribution are balanced across participants. Farmers play a foundational role, but the system also depends on investments in infrastructure, logistics and technology. Much like other large industries, such as pharmaceuticals or energy, effective coordination across the supply chain is key to ensuring both efficiency and equitable value distribution. If you had to choose one metric to prove the model works, income uplift, emission reduction, fuel substitution, or soil health, what would it be? The most definitive measure of success is the extent to which bioenergy replaces fossil fuels. Large-scale fuel substitution indicates that the system is functioning efficiently and delivering real impact. As bioenergy displaces conventional fuels, it naturally leads to multiple positive outcomes, including lower emissions, higher farmer incomes through residue monetisation and improved waste management practices. In that sense, fuel substitution serves as the central indicator, with other benefits emerging as natural outcomes of a well-established ecosystem. It also reflects the sector’s contribution to the broader energy transition, supported by developments such as ethanol blending and increased use of compressed biogas across industries and transport. -- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3677/from-fish-and-chips-to-butter-chicken-how-india-and-uk-are-rediscovering-each-others-food-cultures.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3677/from-fish-and-chips-to-butter-chicken-how-india-and-uk-are-rediscovering-each-others-food-cultures.html Tue, 07 Apr 2026 13:36:32 +0530 A quiet but telling shift is underway in global food curiosity—and it is playing out not in restaurants, but in search bars New research by Cargo Force ( https://www.cargoforce.com/ ) reveals a sharp rise in online searches for British foods in India, pointing to a growing cultural openness and evolving taste preferences. At the same time, British consumers continue to show an enduring—and expanding—love for Indian cuisine. Together, these parallel trends signal something deeper than fleeting curiosity: A two-way culinary exchange that reflects globalisation, digital influence, and shifting food identities. India’s Growing Curiosity for British Cuisine The data shows that Indian consumers are increasingly exploring British food, with search volumes revealing both nostalgia-driven interest and openness to new flavours. At the top of the list are custard (27,000 monthly searches) and semolina (24,000)—two foods that are not entirely foreign to Indian kitchens. Their popularity suggests familiarity rather than novelty, hinting at shared culinary overlaps shaped by history and adaptation. Custard, for instance, has long been integrated into Indian desserts, while semolina (sooji/rava) is a staple across Indian households. However, the list quickly expands into distinctly British territory. Cadbury Dairy Milk (10,000), a globally recognised chocolate brand with deep roots in both the UK and India, ranks third, bridging the gap between local consumption and international branding. Further down, iconic British dishes such as fish and chips (6,400), scones (4,500), and trifle (3,800) point to a growing willingness among Indian consumers to explore traditional UK fare beyond what is already familiar. Even everyday staples like gravy (3,300), snacks such as Maltesers (3,300), and baked goods including digestive biscuits (3,100) and shortbread (2,200) are drawing attention. Together, these search patterns suggest that Indian consumers are not just dabbling in British cuisine—they are engaging with it across categories, from desserts to main meals to pantry staples. Sweet Tooth Leads the Way A closer look at the data reveals a clear trend: sweet and comfort foods dominate Indian searches for British cuisine. Custard, semolina, Cadbury Dairy Milk, trifle, Maltesers, digestive biscuits, and shortbread collectively account for a large share of interest. This reflects a broader consumer psychology—people tend to explore new cuisines through familiar entry points, and desserts often serve as that gateway. There is also a strong emotional dimension. Foods like custard and semolina are associated with childhood, home cooking, and comfort. Their popularity suggests that Indian consumers are not merely experimenting with foreign cuisine but are gravitating toward foods that evoke warmth and nostalgia. This overlap between familiarity and novelty is critical. It lowers the barrier to entry, making British cuisine more approachable and less intimidating. The Appeal of British Comfort Classics Beyond sweets, the data shows a steady interest in traditional British comfort foods. RankFoodIndia Monthly Searches1Custard27,0002Semolina24,0003Cadbury Dairy Milk10,0004Fish and Chips6,4005Scones4,500 Fish and chips, often considered the UK’s most iconic dish, is attracting significant attention with 6,400 searches. Its appeal may lie in its simplicity—deep-fried fish paired with potatoes is not far removed from Indian culinary preferences, where fried foods are widely popular. Similarly, scones and shortbread reflect a growing curiosity about British baking traditions. These items are increasingly featured in cafes and bakeries across urban India, suggesting that offline exposure may be reinforcing online interest. Meanwhile, the presence of gravy (3,300 searches) indicates interest in the broader structure of British meals. Unlike Indian gravies, which are often rich and spiced, British gravies are typically simpler, meat-based, and used as accompaniments. The curiosity here may stem from a desire to understand these differences and experiment with them at home. Digital Media as a Culinary Catalyst One of the most significant drivers behind this trend is the role of digital platforms. According to Cargo Force’s logistics expert Asad Mirza, cultural curiosity is being fuelled by global media, online recipes, and social platforms. Food content—from YouTube tutorials to Instagram reels and cooking blogs—has made it easier than ever for people to discover, learn, and recreate international dishes. Streaming platforms and television shows also play a role. British baking competitions, cooking shows, and travel documentaries introduce audiences to dishes like scones, trifle, and roast dinners, often sparking interest that translates into online searches. Importantly, the rise of e-commerce and improved logistics means that ingredients once considered hard to find are now more accessible. This reduces friction between curiosity and action, allowing consumers to move from searching to cooking with relative ease. A Mirror Trend: Britain’s Love Affair with Indian Food While India is exploring British cuisine, the reverse trend is even more pronounced—and more deeply rooted. RankFoodIndia Monthly Searches1Chicken Tikka Masala43,0002Butter Chicken41,0003Paratha38,0004Biryani31,0005Roti30,000 Search data from the UK shows overwhelming interest in Indian food, with chicken tikka masala (43,000 searches) and butter chicken (41,000) leading the list by a significant margin. These dishes, rich in flavour and adapted to British tastes over decades, have become staples of the UK’s culinary landscape. But the data goes beyond these well-known favourites. Traditional Indian breads such as paratha (38,000), roti (30,000), and chapati (24,000) are also highly searched, indicating a deeper engagement with Indian cuisine beyond restaurant staples. Street foods like pani puri (25,000) and regional dishes such as dosa (19,000) suggest that British consumers are increasingly curious about the diversity of Indian food. Even desserts like gulab jamun (21,000) are gaining traction, pointing to a growing appreciation for Indian sweets. From Colonial Legacy to Culinary Exchange The relationship between Indian and British cuisines is historically complex, shaped by colonial interactions and migration. However, what is emerging now is less about legacy and more about exchange. In the UK, Indian food has long been mainstream, supported by a large diaspora and decades of cultural integration. In India, however, British cuisine has not enjoyed the same level of presence—until now. The current rise in interest suggests a shift. Instead of being perceived as bland or unfamiliar, British food is being rediscovered through a modern lens—one shaped by global media, evolving tastes, and increased exposure. The Economics of Curiosity These search trends also have economic implications. For food brands, restaurants, and retailers, rising curiosity translates into opportunity. British food brands can tap into the Indian market by positioning their products as both novel and accessible. At the same time, Indian brands can leverage the UK’s sustained interest in their cuisine to expand offerings and innovate. Logistics companies like Cargo Force are also likely to benefit, as increased cross-border demand for food products drives the need for efficient supply chains. Moreover, the growing interest in cooking at home—accelerated by the pandemic—has created a market for ingredients, recipes, and ready-to-cook kits that cater to international cuisines. What This Means for the Future of Food The data points to a broader trend: the globalisation of taste is becoming more nuanced. Consumers are no longer satisfied with surface-level exposure to international cuisines. They are digging deeper—exploring traditional recipes, regional variations, and cultural contexts. This is evident in the UK’s interest in items like pani puri and dosa, as well as India’s curiosity about dishes like trifle and fish and chips. At the same time, the blending of cuisines is likely to accelerate. Fusion dishes, cross-cultural adaptations, and hybrid menus are becoming more common, reflecting the interconnected nature of modern food culture. Conclusion: A Two-Way Culinary Conversation The rise in searches for British foods in India—and the sustained demand for Indian cuisine in the UK—highlights a two-way culinary conversation that is gaining momentum. For India, this marks a shift toward greater openness and experimentation, driven by digital access and evolving consumer preferences. For the UK, it reinforces the deep-rooted influence of Indian cuisine while pointing to an appetite for further exploration. Ultimately, these trends are about more than food. They reflect changing identities, increased cultural exchange, and a world where curiosity travels as fast as data. In the age of the internet, the journey from “What is trifle?” to “How do I make it?” is just a few clicks away—and that journey is reshaping how cultures connect, one dish at a time. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3665/hormuz-effect-when-energy-fertilizer-and-food-collide.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3665/hormuz-effect-when-energy-fertilizer-and-food-collide.html Wed, 01 Apr 2026 12:39:54 +0530 FAO Chief Economist Máximo Torero warns of cascading impacts on energy, fertilizer supply, and global food systems as tanker traffic collapses and shipping risks surge The ongoing disruption to the Strait of Hormuz has emerged as a major shock to global commodity flows, with implications for energy, agriculture, and food security. According to Máximo Torero of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, tanker traffic through the corridor has dropped by more than 90 percent within days of the escalation. The strait typically carries around 20 million barrels of oil per day—about 35 percent of global crude flows—along with significant volumes of liquefied natural gas and fertilizers. Speaking at a United Nations briefing, Torero described the situation as a systemic shock affecting global food systems, not just energy markets. He highlighted the Gulf region’s role in supplying nearly half of global sulfur, a key input in phosphate fertilizer production. Disruptions to sulfur flows could impact fertilizer output worldwide, including in major agricultural economies. Shipping challenges have intensified due to surging war-risk insurance premiums, with recovery expected to take months even if tensions ease. Systemic Shock Transmission To what extent does the disruption of the Strait of Hormuz represent a new class of systemic risk, where energy, fertilizer, and food supply chains converge into a single point of failure? The Strait of Hormuz is the world’s most concentrated chokepoint for simultaneously disrupting energy, fertilizer, sulfur, and agrifood systems. Under normal conditions, it carries roughly 20 million barrels of oil per day (one‑quarter of global seaborne oil), one‑fifth of global LNG, and up to 30 percent of internationally traded fertilizers. The current conflict has collapsed tanker traffic by more than 90 percent within days, stalling an estimated 3–4 million tonnes of fertilizer trade per month. What makes this a new class of systemic risk is the convergence of three interdependent chains: Energy – oil and gas prices spiked 20–35 percent (Brent) and 50–75 percent (European gas). Fertilizer – no strategic reserves exist; urea prices rose 19 percent in one week. Sulfur – essential to produce phosphate fertilizer. Food – Gulf countries import 70–90 percent of their food, and import‑dependent nations face immediate yield threats. Because natural gas is the feedstock for nitrogen fertilizers, and sulfur (half of global trade passes through Hormuz) is essential for phosphate processing, a single disruption simultaneously raises fuel costs, fertilizer prices, and transport expenses. The FAO notes that “there are no large strategic fertilizer reserves comparable to oil stocks,” so any sustained interruption quickly elevates global food inflation. This convergence turns a maritime chokepoint into a single point of failure for the entire agrifood value chain. Fragility vs. Resilience of Globalization Does this crisis fundamentally challenge the assumption that globalized agricultural supply chains are efficiency‑maximizing, but structurally fragile in the face of geopolitical shocks? Global supply chains are needed to assure all countries have access to the diversity of food that is required and to use our natural resources optimally. Although it is true that on the inputs there are shock points  that increase the risks for global supply chains but will be the same for local supply chains. The FAO analysis shows that the current globalized system delivered low costs and just‑in‑time efficiency in peacetime, but the Hormuz disruption exposes its structural fragility. Within days, a conflict in one region removed a quarter of global oil trade, one‑third of fertilizer trade, and a major share of food demand from the Gulf. The document highlights that the Gulf States’ high import dependency (70–90 percent for staples) was sustainable only when trade routes were open. Once the strait closed, their strategic grain reserves (4–6 months) became a finite buffer, not a solution. Similarly, fertilizer‑importing countries like Bangladesh (53 percent Gulf dependency) and Kenya ( 40 percent ) face immediate shortages with no alternative supply chain ready. The FAO’s modeling of a “policy inaction baseline” shows that without coordinated intervention, real household income in Gulf countries could decline 14–18 percent, and global cereal producer income could drop nearly 5 percent. This is not a temporary inefficiency; it is a structural vulnerability built into efficiency‑maximized, highly concentrated supply chains. The crisis therefore challenges the assumption that globalization’s benefits automatically outweigh its geopolitical risks. Fertilizer Dependency Trap Given the heavy reliance on energy‑linked fertilizers, are we approaching a structural ceiling in yield growth, where input dependency itself becomes the primary constraint on global food security? The evidence points toward a growing constraint, not yet a hard ceiling, but dangerously close in many regions. Nitrogen fertilizers are produced from natural gas, and the Persian Gulf is a low‑cost producer. When energy prices spike, fertilizer prices follow directly. The FAO estimates that if the crisis continues, global fertilizer prices could average 15–20 percent higher in the first half of 2026. The “dependency trap” operates through three mechanisms: Cost‑driven reduction – Farmers facing high prices apply less fertilizer, reducing yields. No strategic reserves – Unlike oil, there is no global fertilizer stockpile to smooth shocks. Nonlinear yield response – In low‑input systems (e.g., sub‑Saharan Africa at ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3659/the-conflict-in-the-middle-east-is-causing-commodity-prices-to-soar.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3659/the-conflict-in-the-middle-east-is-causing-commodity-prices-to-soar.html Fri, 27 Mar 2026 14:00:04 +0530 “The current escalation in the Middle East is hitting commodity markets hard. Whether the conflict becomes deadlocked will determine the extent of the current shock on the downstream part of the value chain,” says Simon Lacoume, sector economist at Coface. 25 days after the launch of the Israeli American offensive against Iran, disruptions to the supply of raw materials via the Strait of Hormuz continue to fuel prices volatility. For the time being, oil & gas, fertilizers, petrochemical derivatives and aluminum are particularly affected. “The current escalation in the Middle East is hitting commodity markets hard. Whether the conflict becomes deadlocked will determine the extent of the current shock on the downstream part of the value chain,” Simon Lacoume, sector economist at Coface. Oil prices: a long-lasting shock The recent attacks on the Ras Laffan gas complex in Qatar have triggered a further rise in the price of energy commodities. Brent crude, peaking at $119 last week – rose by 50% in a month. This rise is not uniform. Oman DME crude has exceeded $160 per barrel, whilst US WTI is hovering around $100 per barrel, reflecting a highly uneven impact on prices depending on the region and the product. As the conflict drags on, this rise is already beginning to spread down the value chain. In the United States, regular gasoline retail prices have reached an historic high ($3.96/gallon, up 35% month-on-month). In Asia, diesel prices (Singapore) have almost tripled since the start of the conflict, to $256/barrel, whilst global jetfuel prices have doubled, according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA). Natural gas at the heart of supply disruptions The rise is also evident in natural gas. In Europe, gas futures contracts (the Dutch TTF index) have surged by 85% in a month, to €55/MWh, whilst the Asian benchmark (LNG Japan/Korea Marker) has doubled over the same period, reflecting the persistent vulnerability of importing markets. By comparison, the US market appears less exposed to supply disruptions. The US Henry Hub is nonetheless under strong upward pressure (+36% month-on-month), a sign that energy tensions have already spread globally. Prices for many petrochemical compounds are rising exponentially The Gulf states are Asia’s leading suppliers of petrochemical products1 , which are essential to the entire plastics industry. A ton of naphtha has reached $1,000 in Singapore, an increase of over 60% since the start of the conflict. The combination of tensions in the Strait of Hormuz and historically low Asian stocks (2 to 3 weeks) has already driven up the prices of polymers (polypropylene, polyethylene, polystyrene, PVC). This now poses a risk of spillover across the entire value chain. Consequently, this trend is also affecting sulfur, a key input for the leaching2 of copper and nickel ore. The 25% price rise in a single month is putting major, highly dependent mining producers such as Chile, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Indonesia at risk. Fertilizer prices are soaring, despite a ‘favorable’ agricultural calendar Thanks to cheap domestic energy supplies, the Gulf states3 occupy a central position in these markets, accounting for nearly 19 % of global nitrogen fertilizer exports and 36 % of global urea volume, whilst Saudi Arabia is the 4th largest exporter of phosphates (Map 1). However, natural gas accounts for up to 80% of nitrogen fertilizer production costs. The surge in gas prices therefore automatically leads to a rise in fertilizer prices: the price of a ton of granular urea (FOB Middle East) has risen by 37%, to $665, since the start of the conflict. The impact remains limited, however, given a favorable timing. For the moment, only US grain producers appear to be affected, but if the disruptions were to persist, then Brazil, India or even Europe would be more exposed. The negative effects could even extend beyond direct fertilizer flows – to India, Brazil or the United States, for which the Gulf states account for 63%, 24% and 21% of nitrogen fertilizer imports respectively – by affecting third countries such as Morocco, the world’s leading producer of phosphate rock, which is heavily dependent on sulfur exported by the Gulf states. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3649/why-india-why-now-global-spotlight-on-sugarcane-transformation.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3649/why-india-why-now-global-spotlight-on-sugarcane-transformation.html Tue, 24 Mar 2026 12:22:31 +0530 Exclusive AgroSpectrum interview with Manisha Majumdar, on why India is reshaping the global sugarcane narrative In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Manisha Majumdar, Head APAC, Bonsucro, explains why India’s scale as the world’s second-largest sugar producer, combined with its rapid shift toward ethanol and bio-based industries, makes this a pivotal moment to spotlight the country globally. She highlights how regions like Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, and Karnataka are not only production hubs but also emerging centers of sustainability innovation, supporting millions of smallholder farmers. Manisha emphasizes that India must transition from a volume-driven sugar economy to a climate-resilient, sustainability-led value chain through diversification, water efficiency, and regenerative agriculture. She underscores that credible certification systems such as Bonsucro are becoming strategic tools to ensure traceability, meet global ESG norms, and unlock premium markets while strengthening India’s climate narrative amid ethanol expansion. Looking ahead to 2030, she concludes that aligning policy, finance, and global buyer commitments will be critical to positioning India as a model for climate-smart, inclusive, and competitive sugarcane production. Why India, Why Now? India is the world’s second-largest sugar producer. What makes this the right moment for Bonsucro to spotlight India on the global stage, and what signal does choosing New Delhi in the future send to international markets? Sugarcane production supports the livelihoods of around 50 million farmers in India including a large number of smallholders, making it critical to rural development, food security and climate resilience across the key producing regions of Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra and Karnataka. For Bonsucro, India is an important region, and our footprint has grown steadily over the years. Many members stand out for their pioneering activities like investments in regenerative agriculture, strengthening youth and women leadership and championing practices that reduce water use among others. As well as scale, India is emerging as a leader in innovation and transformation, with many of its 500+ sugar mills evolving beyond traditional sugar production, to process ethanol for biofuels, putting India on the stage as a key player helping to shape the future of sugarcane and bio-based industries. From Output to Outcomes India has traditionally been a volume-driven sugar economy. What structural shifts are needed to reposition sugarcane from a production-centric crop to a sustainability-led, climate-resilient value chain? The sugar economy in India has long been volume driven. For the sector to operate more sustainably, shifts that focus on aligning policy, markets, technology and sustainability standards that demonstrate environmental and social performance are essential. For example, diversification of income streams through ethanol, bioenergy or sustainable aviation fuels would enable mills to optimise the whole sugarcane value chain rather than focusing on sugar output alone, and leading to less waste, more resource efficiency and emissions reductions. When it comes to natural resources, sugarcane is a water-intensive crop, which is a strain on the environment. Changes like scaling drip irrigation or incentivising soil health and regenerative agriculture practices can make production more efficient. Bonsucro member EID Parry recently launched a project in Southern India supported by the Bonsucro Impact Fund to train a network of rural entrepreneurs to help farmers rebuild their soils. The project combines technology, using a mobile app to monitor soil health, with regenerative practices that test the use of crop residues, press mud and green manure to boost soil carbon, cut fertiliser use and improve yields, with ambitious but achievable expected outcomes that can be scaled to reach more farmers. Supply chain traceability and credible certification systems like Bonsucro are central to supporting alignment with emerging ESG and due diligence requirements in global markets with certified mills and producers being able to better access international markets and prove their compliance. Standards as Strategic Tools to Access Premium Buyers and Align with ESG Protocols How can sustainability standards and certification frameworks move beyond compliance to become competitive tools that enhance market access, price realization, and global credibility for Indian sugar exports? In order to move beyond compliance, sustainability standards and certification frameworks need to demonstrate impact and value. They must strengthen traceability, provide verified sustainability data, as well as enable credible impact and due diligence claims that align with global frameworks and ultimately build trust with international markets and buyers. As a metric standard, the Bonsucro Production Standard and its suite of climate tools support sugarcane producers in demonstrating their social and environmental performance and provide buyers with the assurance that the products they purchase meet their needs. Ethanol Expansion & Climate Credentials With India rapidly scaling ethanol blending, how critical is credible sustainability certification in ensuring that biofuel expansion strengthens — rather than weakens — India’s climate narrative? India’s expansion of ethanol blending presents a significant opportunity to support energy security and climate goals, but it’s essential that the growth is coupled with strong guardrails that ensure the ethanol comes from sustainably produced sources. India has successfully achieved its target of blending 20 per cent ethanol with petrol (E20) five years ahead of schedule and the country's ongoing biofuel blending efforts have contributed significantly to reducing carbon dioxide emissions and conserving financial resources. Nonetheless, concerns remain regarding the diversion of food crops, prompting discussions about the issue of "food versus fuel." Therefore, to maintain domestic and international confidence, the programme is now focusing on its sustainability credentials, addressing concerns regarding water consumption, food security, and technical compatibility. Certification serves as a key mechanism for demonstrating that production processes yield genuine climate benefits and prevent unintended environmental or social consequences. Standards such as Bonsucro’s EU RED-recognised certification provide a practical pathway for producers to verify emissions performance, traceability, and responsible production practices. When implemented, this certification supports compliance for exports to the EU and strengthens confidence among international buyers and investors, which ultimately reinforces India’s climate narrative by demonstrating its ethanol production is aligned with global sustainability expectations. Water, Carbon & Traceability Sugarcane is often criticised for its water footprint. How can measurement, data transparency, and traceability systems help India demonstrate real improvements in water efficiency and carbon performance? Bonsucro is leveraging digital tools, satellite monitoring, and farm-level data systems to enable sugarcane producers to track water use and carbon performance with increasing precision, often in near-real-time. These technological advancements facilitate the monitoring of environmental, social, and economic sustainability across the sugarcane supply chain. Being able to understand and measure water and other resource use is essential to show what concrete improvements are happening and for highlighting where changes need to be made. Linking this data to traceable supply chains helps demonstrate measurable progress over time. Certification systems like Bonsucro provide a framework for verifying this data and translating it into credible sustainability claims. The latest data shows that Bonsucro certified farms reduce water us by 31 per cent on average over five years of certification. Satellite data is used to map sugarcane fields and monitor growth. This helps estimate water requirements, identify water logging or drought, and monitor biomass, which is used for carbon calculations. The use of these digital tools helps farmers shift towards practices that manage water scarcity and reduce carbon emissions in India, a critical step considering that sugarcane is a major water user in states like Maharashtra. Smallholder Inclusion India’s sugar economy is dominated by millions of smallholder farmers. What models has Bonsucro seen globally that successfully integrate smallholders into certified supply chains without imposing prohibitive compliance costs? India already stands out globally for the sheer scale of its certified farming base, with a large and diverse network of growers engaged in sustainability standards across the sugarcane sector. This matters in a country where production is dominated by smallholders, for whom certification can otherwise feel complex and costly. Group certification models have proven particularly effective in this context. By enabling sugar mills to support and coordinate networks of farmers under a single certification framework, these models reduce compliance costs and administrative burdens for individual smallholders. Mills play a central role in providing training, data collection and technical assistance, while farmers benefit from shared systems and collective progress. This approach can accelerate certification uptake and strengthens long term relationships between mills and farming communities, making sustainability more accessible and scalable across India’s sugarcane landscape. Bonsucro takes two approaches: we introduced our first Production Standard for Smallholder Farmers in 2018, adapting the original Bonsucro Production Standard to facilitate collecting data on a smaller scale and thereby reducing implementation costs and making certification more accessible. Context can vary between regions which is why it’s important to tailor the approach and develop collective efforts from the whole supply chain. Bonsucro is currently in the process of revising its Production Standard for Smallholder Farmers and the draft standard is open for public consultation. Through the Bonsucro Impact Fund we also invest in initiatives on the ground to support smallholders on their sustainability journey. Trade & Carbon Border Mechanisms As global markets move toward carbon border adjustments and stricter ESG-linked import norms, how exposed is India’s sugar sector — and how can proactive certification future-proof exports? India’s sugar sector is becoming increasingly exposed to evolving global trade rules that link market access to climate and sustainability performance. While sugar itself is not currently a priority commodity under the EU Deforestation Regulation, the introduction of EUDR sends a clear signal about the direction of travel for agricultural supply chains more broadly. Alongside expanding ESG disclosure and due diligence requirements in major markets, expectations around traceability, land use transparency and carbon reporting are rising rapidly. Together, these trends are reshaping how sustainability performance is assessed and communicated, increasing the strategic importance for sugar producing countries like India to demonstrate credible, verifiable progress across environmental and social dimensions. In this context, proactive certification can play an important future-proofing role. Standards such as Bonsucro provide verified data on emissions, land use, and supply chain traceability, helping producers demonstrate alignment with emerging sustainability requirements and meet the expectations of international buyers and regulators. By adopting credible certification and transparent data systems early, India’s sugar sector can position itself ahead of regulatory shifts, protecting export competitiveness while strengthening its reputation as a responsible and climate-aligned supplier in global markets. Financing the Transition Can sustainability certification unlock preferential finance, green bonds, or blended capital for Indian mills and farmer cooperatives? Are lenders beginning to price climate performance into sugar value chains? Yes, we have seen that certification can unlock sustainable finance in various markets. As lenders and investors place greater emphasis on ESG performance, they are looking for credible and verifiable data on emissions, resource use, and supply chain practices. Certification systems like Bonsucro provide exactly that - independent verification that mills and farmer groups meet recognised sustainability benchmarks. This can support access to preferential finance mechanisms, including sustainability-linked loans, green bonds, and blended finance facilities, where terms are linked to environmental performance indicators such as emissions reductions or water efficiency. Development banks and private lenders are increasingly exploring these models in agriculture, particularly where certification provides trusted performance metrics. Bonsucro certification can support certified mills in India with this, but the vast majority currently operate without being able to independently prove sustainability performance. The 2030 Vision Looking ahead to 2030, what would define success for India’s sugarcane transition — and what must industry, policymakers, and global buyers do today to ensure sugarcane becomes a model for climate-smart agriculture? By 2030, success for India’s sugarcane transition would mean moving beyond a production-driven model to one where productivity, climate resilience, and sustainability performance go hand in hand. This would include measurable reductions in water intensity, verified lower carbon emissions per tonne of cane, and a growing share of mills participating in traceable and certified supply chains. It would also mean a more diversified value chain, where sugarcane supports not only sugar production but also ethanol, bioenergy, and other bio-based products, helping strengthen India’s energy transition while improving the overall economics of the crop. We are already seeing this through Bonsucro’s members, with many of India’s 524 sugar mills already evolving beyond the traditional sugar production. Achieving this will require coordinated action, with industry investment in climate-smart farming practices and efficient irrigation amongst other things, policymakers aligning incentives with resource efficiency and low-carbon production, and global buyers recognising and rewarding sustainability performance through long-term sourcing commitments and support for standards such as Bonsucro. If these pieces come together, sugarcane could become a strong example of how a major commodity sector can combine farmer livelihoods, climate action, and global market competitiveness. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agropsectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3648/regulatory-win-positions-bioprime-for-scale.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3648/regulatory-win-positions-bioprime-for-scale.html Mon, 23 Mar 2026 12:36:56 +0530 Renuka Diwan, Co-Founder & Chief Executive Officer, BioPrime AgriSolutions, says full portfolio approval marks a shift from regulatory clearance to scalable growth and stronger market credibility In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Renuka Diwan, highlights that securing regulatory approval for its entire biostimulant portfolio marks a major strategic milestone for the company. She emphasizes that this achievement validates BioPrime’s strong scientific foundation and positions it ahead in an increasingly regulated and competitive biologicals market. The company differentiates itself through proprietary bioactive compounds and a science-led approach, avoiding commoditization. With approvals in place, BioPrime is now focused on expanding in India while building global partnerships and demonstrating clear return on investment for farmers. Looking ahead, the company aims to drive innovation in next-generation biologicals, including biofungicides and climate-resilient agricultural solutions. Regulatory Breakthrough as Strategic Inflection Your full portfolio has now secured regulatory approval across biostimulant categories. Beyond compliance, how does this milestone fundamentally change BioPrime’s competitive positioning in India’s fast-evolving biologicals market? India has established a substantial and evolving agriculture regulatory ecosystem, characterized by a mix of long-standing, tradition-based regulations, modern digital initiatives and specialized agencies aimed at ensuring food security, safety, sustainability and technology adoption. For BioPrime to secure approvals for our biostimulant portfolio in this stringent and robust regulatory environment, is more than just compliance – it is a strategic validation of the science behind our innovations. The fact that our entire portfolio has secured the requisite approvals demonstrates that our products meet the desired standards for characterization, efficacy and safety. This milestone creates a clear differentiation. While the market has historically witnessed a large number of loosely defined products, the new regulatory ecosystem favours companies that have invested in scientific rigour and product validation. BioPrime’s portfolio of biostimulants are based on new active ingredients with novel modes of action and are IP protected. Consequently, this approval grants BioPrime the capacity to scale with assurance, cultivate deeper alliances with premier agri-input companies and strategically enter new markets supported by comprehensive compliance and defensibility. From Lab to Licensed Product India’s regulatory regime for biostimulants has tightened considerably in recent years. What were the most complex scientific or compliance hurdles you had to overcome, and what does this approval signal about the maturity of India’s biologicals ecosystem? The journey from laboratory discovery to regulatory approval is complex, particularly in biologicals. One of the key challenges has been the need to characterize bioactive compounds precisely while maintaining the complexity inherent to biological extracts. India also has strict residue – heavy metal, insecticide pesticide limits and requires extremely strict adherence to these requirements. For us at BioPrime, the most demanding aspect was aligning advanced scientific discovery—such as secondary metabolite profiling and plant response validation—with regulatory documentation requirements under the Fertilizer Control Order (FCO) framework. This process required extensive field validation, analytical characterization and standardization of manufacturing processes. The successful approvals signal the broader maturation of India’s biologicals ecosystem. This progress should aid the sector move away from loosely defined inputs and towards scientifically validated products that deliver consistent performance at scale. Science vs. Commodity Play The biostimulants market often risks commoditization. With over 20 differentiated products featuring proprietary active ingredients, how do you ensure BioPrime remains science-led rather than competing on price alone? The risk of commoditization in biostimulants is real, especially in segments dominated by generic seaweed or humic products. BioPrime has thus made a deliberate choice to follow a distinct path. Our approach is centered on discovering and developing specific secondary metabolites that trigger defined physiological responses in plants—whether related to stress tolerance, nutrient efficiency or reproductive performance. This science-led development allows us to build products with clear modes of action and differentiated outcomes. With proprietary active ingredients, our strategy is to build strong IP barriers .Farmers and institutional partners ultimately value predictable outcomes and that is where science-driven innovation creates long-term differentiation. Defensible Innovation and IP You’ve emphasized developing novel active ingredients from unconventional raw materials. How critical is intellectual property and defensible science in building long-term enterprise value in biologicals? In biologicals, defensible innovation is essential for building long-term enterprise value. Many products in the market rely on broadly available raw materials, which makes differentiation difficult. At BioPrime, we focus on identifying novel bioactive compounds from unconventional natural sources and translating them into functional agricultural solutions. Protecting these discoveries through Intellectual Property (IP)—combined with proprietary extraction and formulation processes creates a defensible moat. IP, however, is only one component. True defensibility comes from integrating scientific discovery, regulatory approval, manufacturing capability and field validation. When these elements come together, the result is a platform that can continuously generate differentiated product. Market Expansion Strategy With regulatory clearance in place, what is your immediate commercial roadmap? Are you prioritizing deeper domestic penetration, export markets, or strategic partnerships with larger agri-input companies? With regulatory approvals in place, BioPrime’s focus now is on scaling adoption through a combination of domestic expansion and strategic partnerships. India remains a key market for us, given the increasing farmer interest in biological solutions and the strong distribution networks of agri-input companies. At the same time, we are actively expanding collaborations with global agribusiness partners who are looking to incorporate biological technologies into their portfolios. BioPrime’s strategy is therefore two- fold: deepen penetration in key domestic crop segments while leveraging partnerships to accelerate global market access. Biologicals in the Era of Regenerative Agriculture As sustainability transitions from aspiration to operational necessity, where do you see biostimulants fitting within regenerative agriculture frameworks? Can biological inputs meaningfully reduce dependence on conventional agrochemicals at scale? Biostimulants play a critical role in enabling regenerative agriculture by improving plant resilience, nutrient use efficiency and soil health interactions. Rather than replacing conventional inputs entirely, biologicals can complement them by making nutrient delivery more efficient and helping plants withstand environmental stress. This integration reduces input intensity while maintaining productivity. As agriculture moves towards sustainability-driven models, biological solutions will increasingly become part of integrated crop management systems that combine nutrition, crop protection and soil regeneration. Farmer Economics and ROI In a market where farmer margins remain tight, how do you communicate measurable return on investment? What data points or field outcomes best demonstrate the economic case for adopting differentiated biostimulants? Ultimately, adoption is driven by economics. Farmers need to see clear and consistent return on investments. At BioPrime, we focus on outcomes that directly translate into economic value —improved crop vigour, higher flower-to-fruit conversion, better yield realizations and enhanced quality parameters.One often ignored aspect is reduction in crop/ yield loss due to climatic fluctuations. This is a tricky parameter as loss is always not apparent and visible. BioPrime’s field validations across multiple crops helps generate the data needed to demonstrate these benefits. Equally important is communicating these results in a simple and practical way through field demonstrations, institutional trials, and partnerships with agribusiness companies. When farmers see the impact in their own fields, adoption follows naturally. The Next Frontier Now that the regulatory foundation is secured, what is the next frontier for BioPrime —next-generation bioactives, carbon-linked agriculture solutions, precision biological delivery, or global expansion? With regulatory foundations now in place, BioPrime’s focus is on advancing the next generation of biological innovation. This includes discovering new bioactive molecules through our research platforms, exploring opportunities in areas such as climate resilience and carbon-linked agricultural solutions. We have a very strong pipeline in biocontrol segment and will soon we launching several Biofungicides. At a broader level, BioPrime has evolved from being just a product-focused company into a science platform for agricultural biologicals, capable of delivering differentiated solutions for farmers and partners across global markets. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3644/farming-desert-seas-how-technology-is-rewriting-future-of-aquaculture.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3644/farming-desert-seas-how-technology-is-rewriting-future-of-aquaculture.html Wed, 18 Mar 2026 18:34:19 +0530 In an exclusive interaction with AgroSpectrum, Marcel Verbrugge, Aquaculture engineer, Dahui aquaculture limited outlines how desert aquaculture is emerging as a scalable solution for food security, water efficiency, and climate resilience As climate stress and resource scarcity redefine global food systems, aquaculture is rapidly breaking free from its coastal roots—moving into some of the world’s most extreme environments. Along the edges of the Taklamakan Desert, cutting-edge innovations in water chemistry, microbial engineering, and Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) are turning inhospitable terrain into high-efficiency seafood production hubs. This shift is gaining momentum in regions like Saudi Arabia, where food security imperatives and policy backing are accelerating investment in desert-based farming. What was once experimental is now emerging as a scalable, technology-driven blueprint for resilient, localized protein production. Against this backdrop, several companies are pushing the technological frontier—integrating RAS, artificial seawater systems, and climate-controlled infrastructure to unlock new production ecosystems. The model also aligns with broader shifts toward circular resource use, digital monitoring, and precision farming. This interview with Marcel Verbrugge explores how these innovations are converging, what it takes to scale them sustainably, and whether desert aquaculture could redefine the future of global food production in an era of climate stress and resource constraints. Transforming the fringes of the Taklamakan Desert into productive aquaculture farms represents a striking reimagining of landscape and resource use. What technological and ecological breakthroughs made it possible to cultivate fish and shrimp in such an extreme environment? The single most critical challenge—and indeed the defining breakthrough—has been water engineering: the ability to convert chemically hostile saline-alkali groundwater into a stable, biologically productive aquaculture medium. In regions such as the Taklamakan Desert, groundwater is not scarce, but it is inherently unsuitable for aquaculture due to high salinity and extreme alkalinity. The innovation lies in systematically transforming this constraint into a controlled aquatic ecosystem through a multi-stage process often described as “salt-alkali water seawater restoration.” The first stage is baseline utilization. Farmers tap into shallow aquifers—often just two meters below the surface—where naturally saline groundwater can reach salinity levels of up to 8 parts per thousand. While this salinity is lower than seawater, it provides a foundational mineral profile that can be engineered further, reducing the need to build water chemistry from scratch. The second stage involves precise chemical balancing. The native groundwater is typically highly alkaline, with pH levels ranging from 9.5 to as high as 11—far beyond the tolerance range of most aquatic species. Through a combination of desalination and dealkalization techniques—primarily by blending with freshwater and applying buffering agents—the water is carefully adjusted to a pH range of 7.5 to 8.5. This calibrated environment closely mimics marine conditions found in bodies such as the South China Sea, creating a chemically stable foundation for aquaculture. The most sophisticated layer of this transformation is microbial mimicry. Proprietary microbial consortia and beneficial bacterial communities are introduced not merely to purify the water, but to actively regulate and stabilize its biochemical dynamics. These microbes facilitate nutrient cycling, control ammonia and nitrite levels, and gradually establish a living, self-regulating system that behaves like a natural seawater ecosystem. This step is critical in enabling the successful cultivation of marine species such as shrimp and seabass in a completely artificial inland environment. Beyond water chemistry, controlled-environment infrastructure plays a complementary role. In countries like Saudi Arabia, desert aquaculture is increasingly integrated with greenhouse-based systems and hybrid water models that combine saline and freshwater inputs. These enclosed or semi-enclosed systems buffer extreme temperature fluctuations, reduce evaporation losses, and allow year-round production under tightly regulated conditions. Taken together, these breakthroughs—hydrochemical engineering, microbial ecosystem design, and climate-controlled infrastructure—represent a fundamental shift in how aquaculture environments are created. Rather than relying on naturally suitable ecosystems, producers are now able to design and replicate optimal aquatic conditions in some of the harshest landscapes on earth. Desert aquaculture relies on saline groundwater, engineered ponds, and tightly monitored production systems. From a sustainability perspective, how viable is this model over the long term, particularly with regard to water management, soil salinity, and ecosystem balance? Long-term sustainability in desert aquaculture hinges on how effectively operations transition from resource extraction to closed-loop, circular production systems. Given the fragility of arid ecosystems, the model’s viability is being defined by innovations that simultaneously address water efficiency, soil protection, and ecosystem balance. At the core is advanced water stewardship. Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) have fundamentally redefined water use efficiency, enabling up to 99 percent recycling within production units. This dramatically reduces dependence on freshwater inputs—an essential advantage in desert regions where water scarcity is the primary constraint. In parallel, Integrated Aqua-Vegeculture Systems (iAVs) extend this efficiency by channeling nutrient-rich aquaculture effluents into agriculture. Instead of being discharged as waste, this water is repurposed to irrigate salt-tolerant crops such as halophytes or fodder, effectively converting a liability into a productive input stream. Equally important is the management of soil salinity and environmental leakage. The use of lined ponds and engineered containment systems prevents seepage of saline water into surrounding soils, mitigating long-term land degradation risks. Increasingly, farms are adopting zero-discharge systems, where all process water is treated, recirculated, and reused within the facility. This not only minimizes ecological impact but also enhances regulatory compliance and operational predictability. The model is further strengthened through circular economy integration. Organic waste from aquaculture—such as sludge and residual biomass—is being processed through anaerobic digestion systems to generate biogas, which can partially offset the high energy demands of intensive aquaculture. This is particularly relevant in desert environments, where energy-water trade-offs are critical. Complementing this, the integration of solar power is emerging as a natural fit, leveraging abundant sunlight to reduce reliance on conventional energy sources and improve the overall carbon footprint of operations. Technological sophistication is another defining pillar. Modular RAS designs allow for scalable, compartmentalized production with minimal environmental interaction, reducing biosecurity risks and enabling precise control over farming conditions. On top of this, AI- and IoT-enabled monitoring systems are transforming operational management. Real-time data on water quality, temperature, oxygen levels, and feed efficiency allows for predictive interventions, optimizing both productivity and resource use while minimizing waste and system stress. Finally, the strategic use of brackish groundwater—often unsuitable for agriculture or human consumption—adds an important sustainability dimension. By utilizing this otherwise underutilized resource, desert aquaculture avoids competing with critical freshwater needs, reinforcing its role as a complementary, rather than extractive, food production system. Taken together, these innovations position desert aquaculture not merely as viable, but as a highly engineered, resource-efficient model capable of sustaining long-term production in some of the world’s most water-constrained environments. One of the arguments for inland aquaculture in desert regions is logistical efficiency—bringing seafood production closer to major inland markets. How significant are the economic advantages of reduced transport time and supply-chain costs compared with traditional coastal aquaculture? Inland aquaculture, particularly in desert regions, is increasingly being recognized not just as a technological breakthrough but as a structural shift in supply chain economics. By relocating production closer to consumption centers, the model fundamentally redefines how seafood moves from farm to fork, unlocking efficiencies that extend well beyond simple logistics. The most immediate advantage lies in reduced transport time and cost. Traditional seafood supply chains often depend on long-distance movement from coastal farms to inland consumption hubs, requiring cold-chain infrastructure, multiple handling points, and, in many cases, freezing to preserve shelf life. Inland aquaculture eliminates much of this complexity. Producers situated near major population centers can deliver fresh, never-frozen products within hours rather than days, significantly lowering freight costs while also capturing premium pricing in urban markets where freshness is a key differentiator. This compression of the supply chain also translates into a measurable reduction in carbon emissions. Long-haul transportation—whether by refrigerated trucks, air freight, or shipping—carries a substantial environmental footprint. By shortening these routes, inland systems reduce fuel consumption and emissions intensity per unit of output. In a global context where food systems are under increasing scrutiny for their climate impact, this becomes a strategic advantage, particularly for markets with tightening sustainability regulations. Equally important is the resilience dimension. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility of globally dispersed food supply chains, where disruptions in logistics, port operations, or trade flows can quickly translate into shortages and price volatility. Inland aquaculture offers a more localized and decentralized production model, insulating regions from external shocks and enhancing food security. This localization also has multiplier effects for regional economies—supporting jobs, stimulating ancillary industries, and reducing dependence on imports. Beyond these core benefits, proximity to markets enables greater demand responsiveness. Producers can better align output with consumption patterns, reduce inventory losses, and adapt more quickly to shifts in consumer preferences. This agility is particularly valuable for high-value, perishable commodities like seafood, where timing and quality directly influence margins. Taken together, inland aquaculture is not merely about geographic relocation—it represents a reconfiguration of the seafood value chain, where efficiency, sustainability, and resilience converge to create a more robust and economically viable production model. China’s desert aquaculture experiments are often framed as a new agricultural frontier. Could this model realistically be replicated in other arid regions of the world, such as the Middle East, Central Asia, or parts of Africa, and what prerequisites would be essential for success? The shift toward desert aquaculture is no longer confined to experimental projects—it is actively expanding across regions, demonstrating that the model is both adaptable and scalable under very different economic and environmental conditions. What is emerging globally is not a single approach, but a spectrum of models ranging from high-tech industrial systems to community-driven solutions, all built on the same core principle: decoupling aquaculture from natural water bodies. In Saudi Arabia, aquaculture is being positioned as a strategic pillar of food security. While coastal net-pen farming continues along the Red Sea, the real acceleration is in land-based systems, particularly Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS). These systems allow for controlled, year-round production in desert environments using minimal water. Private players, including startups such as Mustadem, are developing desert-optimized RAS facilities focused on high-value species like sobaity seabream. The objective is clear: reduce import dependence while building a stable, domestic supply of premium seafood tailored to local consumption patterns. The United Arab Emirates is taking a similarly ambitious but more capital-intensive route, emphasizing scale and technological sophistication. Large infrastructure projects—such as a planned 3,000-tonne-per-year RAS facility developed through partnerships between Abu Dhabi-based investment entities and international technology providers—highlight the country’s push toward self-sufficiency. By farming species like rainbow trout in fully controlled desert environments, the UAE is demonstrating how advanced aquaculture can overcome climatic limitations while ensuring consistent quality and output. In contrast, South Africa illustrates a different, equally important pathway. In the Kalahari Desert, initiatives led by INMED South Africa have focused on low-cost, community-based aquaponics systems. These integrated models combine fish farming with vegetable cultivation, dramatically improving resource efficiency—using up to 90 percent less water than traditional agriculture—while delivering tangible social impact. In some cases, vegetable production has increased by 300 percent, with systems becoming a primary source of fresh food for local schools and communities. This underscores that desert aquaculture is not exclusively a high-tech solution; it can also be a tool for grassroots food security and rural development. Bridging these different models are technology providers such as Dahui Aquaculture Limited, which are deploying modular, scalable RAS solutions across regions like Kuwait and the broader GCC. These systems integrate advanced water treatment, climate control, and biosecurity protocols, enabling consistent production even under extreme environmental conditions. Their modular design allows for phased expansion, reducing upfront risk while accelerating adoption in emerging markets. Whether through high-investment, technology-driven systems in the Gulf or community-oriented aquaponics in Africa, the underlying innovation—efficient water use, controlled environments, and system integration—remains constant. This flexibility is precisely what makes desert aquaculture a compelling solution for the future of food production in water-constrained regions. Beyond the novelty of farming seafood in the desert, what broader lessons does this experiment offer about the future of food production—particularly in a world facing climate stress, land degradation, and growing demand for protein? The deeper significance of desert aquaculture lies in its philosophical shift. It challenges the traditional assumption that food production must be tied to naturally fertile environments. Instead, it demonstrates that with the right combination of technology and ecological understanding, production can be decoupled from geography. This model embodies the future of food systems: resilient rather than vulnerable, circular rather than extractive, and precise rather than wasteful. It shows that degraded or extreme landscapes can be repurposed into productive ecosystems, reducing pressure on already stressed natural resources. Perhaps most importantly, it offers a scalable framework for addressing global protein demand without exacerbating deforestation, overfishing, or freshwater depletion. Saudi Arabia’s push toward Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) reflects a strategic response to water scarcity and food security challenges. How transformative is this technology for a desert nation seeking to produce more of its own protein domestically? For a desert nation like Saudi Arabia, the adoption of Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) represents not just a technological upgrade, but a fundamental restructuring of how food can be produced under extreme resource constraints. It directly addresses the Kingdom’s two most binding limitations—acute water scarcity and harsh climatic conditions—while aligning closely with the strategic objectives of Saudi Vision 2030 to enhance food security and reduce import dependence. Conventional aquaculture is inherently water-intensive and geographically dependent on coastal or freshwater ecosystems. RAS breaks both constraints. By operating as a closed-loop system, it continuously filters, treats, and recirculates water within the production unit, achieving recycling efficiencies of up to 99 percent. This dramatically reduces the need for freshwater withdrawals, making it possible to sustain high-density fish production even in the middle of arid desert landscapes. A critical advantage of RAS in the Saudi context is its ability to utilize non-potable water sources. Systems can be designed to operate on saline or brackish groundwater—resources that are otherwise unsuitable for agriculture or human consumption. This ensures that aquaculture does not compete with already limited freshwater supplies, preserving them for domestic and municipal use while still enabling large-scale protein production. Equally transformative is the level of environmental control these systems provide. Modern RAS facilities are typically housed in climate-controlled, prefab structures equipped with automated heating, cooling, and aeration systems. This allows producers to maintain optimal growth conditions regardless of external temperatures, which can fluctuate dramatically in desert environments. As a result, a wide range of species—from freshwater fish to marine species grown in artificial seawater—can be cultivated with high consistency and predictability. This controlled environment also significantly enhances biosecurity. By isolating production from external ecosystems, RAS minimizes exposure to pathogens, pollutants, and environmental variability. This leads to lower mortality rates, reduced reliance on antibiotics, and more stable production cycles—critical factors for building a reliable domestic aquaculture industry. Beyond production efficiency, the technology enables year-round, location-independent farming, effectively decoupling aquaculture from geography. This opens the door for distributed production models closer to consumption centers, further strengthening supply chains. In essence, RAS transforms aquaculture from a resource-dependent activity into a precision-controlled, infrastructure-driven system. For Saudi Arabia, this is not merely about producing fish—it is about building a resilient, self-sufficient protein ecosystem that can operate sustainably within one of the world’s most water-constrained environments. RAS systems can reduce water use by up to 99 percent compared with conventional aquaculture. From an economic and environmental standpoint, how sustainable is this model at scale, particularly in a region where water and energy costs are critical considerations? While Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) are often described as near–closed-loop systems, the operational reality—particularly in desert climates—is more nuanced. Water efficiency remains exceptionally high, but not absolute, and understanding these dynamics is critical to assessing long-term economic and environmental sustainability. In arid regions such as Saudi Arabia, evaporation is the primary source of water loss. High ambient temperatures, combined with aeration and system circulation, typically result in daily water loss of around 5 percent. In addition, a further 2–3 percent of water is discharged through filtration processes—such as mechanical filters, protein skimmers, and sludge removal systems—which are essential to maintaining water quality and system stability. However, what distinguishes advanced RAS operations is how this “lost” water is managed. Rather than being treated as waste, discharge streams are increasingly captured, treated, and repurposed. Nutrient-rich effluent—containing nitrogen, phosphorus, and organic matter—can be reused for agricultural applications, including irrigation of date palms, fodder crops, or other desert-adapted agriculture. This creates a linked aquaculture-agriculture system, where outputs from one process become inputs for another, significantly improving overall resource efficiency. From an economic standpoint, these partial losses are offset by the system’s overall efficiency and the broader operating environment. In many Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia, energy costs are relatively low compared to Europe, often supported by government subsidies or favorable industrial tariffs. This is particularly important because RAS systems are energy-intensive, requiring continuous pumping, filtration, aeration, and temperature control. Moreover, government support plays a pivotal role in enhancing viability. Subsidies, infrastructure investment, and policy backing under frameworks such as Saudi Vision 2030 reduce capital and operational barriers, accelerating adoption at scale. This supportive ecosystem allows producers to absorb higher energy usage while still maintaining competitive production costs. Importantly, ongoing integration of renewable energy—particularly solar—has the potential to further rebalance the water-energy equation. As these systems evolve, the combination of high water reuse, byproduct utilization, and improving energy efficiency is steadily strengthening the sustainability profile of RAS in desert environments. In essence, while RAS is not entirely lossless, it represents a highly optimized system where even inefficiencies are captured and repurposed, making it one of the most viable models for aquaculture in water-constrained regions. Saudi Vision 2030 places strong emphasis on food security and economic diversification. What role do you see advanced aquaculture playing in strengthening the Kingdom’s domestic food supply chains and reducing reliance on seafood imports? To build a more resilient and diversified food supply chain, Saudi Arabia is moving decisively beyond traditional aquaculture staples toward a broader, higher-value species portfolio. While tilapia continues to anchor domestic production—accounting for roughly a third of output—the strategic focus is now on expanding species diversity to enhance nutritional value, market competitiveness, and consumer preference alignment. A key dimension of this shift is the successful introduction of new, high-value species through advanced technologies like Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS). One notable breakthrough has been the cultivation of trout in controlled desert environments—an achievement that would have been unthinkable under conventional aquaculture conditions. This not only expands the domestic availability of premium, omega-3-rich protein but also demonstrates the flexibility of RAS to support species traditionally limited to cooler climates. At the same time, there is a strong emphasis on cultivating native and regionally adapted species. Institutions such as King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) are playing a pivotal role in developing breeding and hatchery programs for species like sobaity seabream, snubnose pompano, and orange-spotted grouper. These species are naturally suited to the Red Sea ecosystem and are highly valued in local markets, making them commercially viable while reducing biological risk. The impact of these efforts is already visible in production data. Saudi Arabia’s aquaculture sector has experienced rapid expansion, with output increasing by more than 55 percent in 2023 to exceed 140,000 tonnes. This growth trajectory is aligned with ambitious national targets to scale production to 600,000 tonnes annually by 2030—a transformation that would significantly rebalance the country’s seafood supply-demand equation. The implications for food security are substantial. By increasing domestic production capacity, the Kingdom can reduce its reliance on seafood imports—currently estimated at around 200,000 tonnes annually—while also stabilizing local markets against global price volatility and supply chain disruptions. This localization of production enhances not only availability but also price predictability and quality control. Crucially, this expansion is not being pursued at the expense of sustainability. The integration of advanced aquaculture technologies, combined with a focus on resource efficiency and environmental management, ensures that growth is aligned with long-term ecological constraints. Under the broader framework of Saudi Vision 2030, aquaculture is evolving from a niche sector into a strategic pillar of national food security and economic diversification. In effect, Saudi Arabia is not just increasing output—it is reengineering its seafood value chain, building a system that is more diverse, technologically advanced, and resilient to external shocks. Looking ahead, could Saudi Arabia emerge as a global leader in desert-based aquaculture innovation? What lessons might other water-scarce regions learn from the Kingdom’s approach to combining sustainability, technology, and food production? Saudi Arabia is already positioning itself as a leader in this space. The combination of strong government backing, access to capital, and a clear strategic imperative has accelerated innovation and deployment at scale. Other water-scarce regions—including Oman, Qatar, and Iraq—are beginning to pivot away from traditional open-pond aquaculture toward recirculating systems, recognizing the limitations imposed by water scarcity. The key lesson is that sustainability and productivity are no longer mutually exclusive. By integrating advanced technology, policy support, and circular resource management, it is possible to build food systems that are both efficient and resilient. Desert aquaculture, once considered improbable, is fast becoming a blueprint for the future of food production in a resource-constrained world. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3638/only-35-of-worlds-land-has-documented-ownership-growing-global-concern.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3638/only-35-of-worlds-land-has-documented-ownership-growing-global-concern.html Mon, 16 Mar 2026 14:18:02 +0530 Dr Ward Anseeuw, Senior Land Tenure Officer, FAO shares insights with AgroSpectrum on land tenure insecurity, inequality in land distribution, and the need for stronger governance reforms. A new global report on land tenure and governance has highlighted slow progress in securing land rights worldwide, revealing that only about 35 percent of the world’s land has formally documented ownership. The findings underscore growing concerns over land tenure insecurity, with nearly 1.1 billion people fearing they could lose their land or housing within the next five years, posing risks to food security, livelihoods, and climate resilience. In this context, AgroSpectrum conducted an exclusive interview with Dr Ward Anseeuw, Senior Land Tenure Officer at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. In the interview, Dr Anseeuw discusses the key findings of the report, including stark inequalities in land ownership, the challenges surrounding customary land rights, and the implications for sustainable agriculture and rural development. He also outlines the urgent need for stronger political commitment, inclusive land governance frameworks, and improved documentation systems to enhance tenure security globally. The Big Picture Only 35 percent of the world’s land is formally documented. After two decades of global policy frameworks, why has progress on tenure security remained so structurally slow? Progress on strengthening tenure security has remained structurally slow since many legal systems still fail to recognize the legitimacy of existing practices, particularly the ownership and management rights of customary and Indigenous communities who, in reality, govern large territories. Where formalization is possible, the high cost and complexity of surveying, registration, and documentation create significant barriers, especially since most systems were never designed to accommodate overlapping or collective rights at scale. At the same time, limited baseline data and incomplete records generate overlapping claims, such as customary use versus statutory ownership or unclear boundaries, which in turn fuel disputes and make it even harder to build reliable, trusted land information systems. Rising InsecurityThe report finds that 1.1 billion people fear losing their land within five years — a figure that is rising. What structural forces are driving this acceleration of land insecurity now? The report finds that roughly 1.1 billion adults, around one in four, fear they could lose rights to some or all of their land or housing within five years, a share that has risen in since 2020. This acceleration is driven by a convergence of structural pressures on land, particularly where rights remain undocumented or legally ambiguous. Intensifying competition from mainstream development, including rapid urban expansion, as well as large-scale industrial agriculture and extractive industries, generate heightened conflict risks and displacement. An additional layer of pressure comes in recent years from the paradoxical “green squeeze,” where climate‑oriented initiatives such as renewable energy installations, biofuel production, conservation programs, and carbon offset project can end up harming areas with existing tenure practices that lack formal protections. All of this unfolds in the broader context of weak tenure documentation globally: with only 35 percent of global land formally recorded and many customary systems remaining in legal limbo, communities face heightened vulnerability precisely when land values and external demand are surging. Climate & Carbon StakesWith Indigenous and customary lands holding an estimated 45 gigatons of irrecoverable carbon, how does insecure tenure undermine global climate commitments, including net-zero pledges? Mapped customary territories hold an estimated 45 gigatons of irrecoverable carbon, which is approximately 37 percent of the global total, and insecure tenure within these communities places these critical carbon reserves at heightened risk. Without recognized and enforceable rights, communities are more vulnerable to pressures that drive deforestation and ecosystem conversion, threatening carbon stocks that cannot be restored on climate‑relevant timescales. The report highlights that Indigenous Peoples, and other customary rights‑holders, occupy roughly 42 percent of the world’s land area but have legally recognized ownership over only about 8 percent, leaving vast high‑carbon landscapes in a state of legal uncertainty. This weakens long‑term stewardship and exposes forests to degradation, undermining the durability required for credible climate action. It also compromises the integrity of net‑zero strategies: land‑based mitigation, offsets, and carbon removal initiatives depend on secure, stable tenure. Without that, the risks of reversals, project failure, and conflict rise, directly jeopardizing the credibility and permanence of national and corporate climate commitments. Inequality & ConcentrationThe top 10 percent of landholders operate 89 percent of agricultural land. Does this concentration represent a productivity reality — or a governance failure? Land concentration can be an outcome of structural transformation in countries where productivity growth led by technological modernization displaces less efficient farms and increases farm sizes while non-farm employment generation absorbs agricultural labor surplus. However, the report notes that “ Evidence shows that having sufficient and equitable access to agricultural land is one of the determinants in achieving poverty reduction and food and nutrition security. Furthermore, equitable agrarian structures support the capital accumulation needed for inclusive growth and structural transformation, particularly at low levels of development and in the long term”. It notes that “Current patterns of structural change show the growth of low-income and informal jobs in the service sector, alongside deindustrialization or insufficient industrialization. The persistence of rural poverty at the lower end of the farm size distribution, when combined with the patterns above, calls  attention to the role of expanded access to land. In countries with both private and public land availability, a range of policy measures, including redistributive approaches where contextually appropriate, remain possible options to reduce rural poverty, enhance food security, mitigate social and political tensions and revitalize rural economies. Where redistribution is not on the agenda due to land scarcity or political sensitivities, other policies, including rent and tenancy control, as well as regulations against land concentration, can be deployed. Customary Systems vs. State ControlIn regions like sub-Saharan Africa, most land is under customary tenure but remains legally undocumented. What political and institutional barriers prevent formal recognition? In sub‑Saharan Africa, while roughly 73 percent of land is held under customary tenure, only about 1 percent is formally recognized and documented, leaving most customary areas with more limited designated use rights, often with documentation, or simply unrecognized by governments and classified as state land. This structural imbalance reflects deep political and institutional barriers. Not all countries legally recognize the longstanding and widely prevalent customary tenure practices, leading to a complete incongruence between customary and statutory systems that does not recognize the reality on the ground. Even where policy commitments exist, translation into practice remains slow, constrained by weak implementation capacity, fragmented institutional mandates, and limited incentives for coordination. These challenges are compounded by the rising economic and political stakes of land, driven by infrastructure expansion, agribusiness, extractive projects, and emerging climate‑related investments, which may make institutions reluctant to pursue reforms that reduce control over valuable land assets. Gender & Generational GapsThe gender gap in land rights exceeds 20 percentage points in nearly half of reporting countries. What policy levers have proven effective in closing this divide — and why are they not scaling faster? The report reveals that in nearly all 49 countries with data on SDG 5.a.1, men are more likely than women to own or hold secure rights to agricultural land, with gender gaps of more than 20 percentage points in almost half of reporting countries. Evidence from long‑standing tenure governance practice points to a set of effective policy levers: joint titling and spousal co‑ownership defaults, strengthened inheritance laws and enforcement, gender‑responsive land administration systems that ensure women’s names appear on documents, low‑cost registration and legal aid, as well as quotas that guarantee women’s representation in local land governance and dispute resolution bodies. Robust gender‑disaggregated data and monitoring also create political incentives for action. Yet despite their demonstrated effectiveness, these approaches remain underutilized. In practice, such reforms can challenge entrenched household and institutional power structures, while many land administration systems remain ill‑equipped to deliver accessible, gender‑responsive services at scale. A significant factor behind weak legal protection is that women’s land rights are deeply interconnected with longstanding religious beliefs, cultural practices, and social norms. Changing such beliefs, practices, and norms is difficult. Together with gender, these intersectional factors shape how land tenure insecurity is experienced. In particular, young women, women from Indigenous Peoples, and other groups living in conditions of marginalization, often face overlapping and mutually reinforcing barriers. However, data on these intersections remain sparse, highlighting a critical area for future research and policy attention. Climate Finance & Land RushThe report suggests that net-zero strategies could require up to 1.2 billion hectares for land-based carbon removal. How do we prevent climate finance from triggering a new wave of land dispossession? The report warns that achieving global net‑zero targets could require land‑based carbon removals on nearly 1.2 billion hectares, raising serious risks of large‑scale land capture. It also notes that environmental and climate concerns are already driving new land acquisitions, including those backed by institutional investors such as pension funds. Preventing dispossession under expanding climate finance requires safeguards commensurate with these risks. First,  climate‑related investments should not proceed without rigorous tenure due diligence showing that rights, especially customary and collective rights, are legally recognized, documented, and supported by accessible grievance mechanisms. Second, more broadly at country level, legal recognition of customary lands must be prioritized before scaling offsets or carbon‑removal projects, since pressures intensify precisely where rights lack formal protection. Finally, climate strategies should favor interventions that do not require dispossession or consolidation of land, such as restoring degraded areas under community stewardship, and ensure that any project with a land footprint is grounded in benefit‑sharing, free, prior and informed consent, and inclusive governance. Accountability & SDGsOnly 12 countries report comprehensively on land-related SDG indicators. Should land tenure security become a more enforceable metric within global development financing frameworks? Given that secure tenure is intrinsically linked with food security, climate action, and biodiversity protection, a strong case can be made that tenure security should be treated as a more enforceable performance condition in development financing, especially where finance is directly land-linked (agriculture transformation, nature-based climate, conservation, infrastructure).  We already do see more emphasis on tenure security in other global frameworks such as the UNCCD and CBD, and aspects of secure tenure rights, such as Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) being embedded in the standards for projects financed by the GEF and GCF. In FAO projects, environmental and social safeguards increasingly require tenure-risk screening a necessity, so progress is being made on that front, although more enforceable requirements in the future could further facilitate accountability. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3623/new-global-standard-for-farm-data-inside-faos-wca-2030-programme.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3623/new-global-standard-for-farm-data-inside-faos-wca-2030-programme.html Wed, 11 Mar 2026 11:15:25 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Jairo Castano of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations explains how the World Programme for the Census of Agriculture 2030 will modernize agricultural censuses, strengthen data-driven policymaking, and support progress toward the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Jairo Castano, Senior Statistician and Leader of the Agricultural Censuses Team at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), discusses the global significance of the newly endorsed World Programme for the Census of Agriculture 2030 (WCA 2030) guidelines. Endorsed by the United Nations Statistical Commission, the programme establishes a new international statistical standard aimed at strengthening agricultural data governance and supporting evidence-based policymaking worldwide. Castano highlights how emerging technologies such as geospatial tools, online data systems, and artificial intelligence will transform the way agricultural census data is collected, validated, and used. He also explains how FAO is supporting countries—particularly developing economies—in building capacity to implement the programme while ensuring data quality and global comparability. Looking ahead, Castano emphasizes that WCA 2030 will play a crucial role in tracking agricultural transformation and monitoring progress toward the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. The WCA 2030 guidelines have now been endorsed as an international statistical standard. What strategic shift does this represent for global agricultural data governance and policymaking over the next decade? The UNSC’s endorsement of the WCA 2030 guidelines as an international statistical standard marks a strategic shift from agriculture being treated as a sectoral data domain to being governed as a core component of the global statistical system, with agreed norms on concepts, methods, and comparability. It signals a move toward integrated, policy‑driven data governance in which agricultural censuses are embedded within national statistical systems, and explicitly linked to benchmarking, accountability, and evidence‑based policymaking. Over the next decade (2026–2035), this positions structural agricultural data as a global public good, strengthening FAO’s stewardship role and enabling more coherent national and international decisions on food security, rural development, and agricultural transformation. The new programme emphasizes innovative technologies such as geospatial tools, online data collection, and artificial intelligence. How will these technologies transform the way agricultural census data is collected, validated, and utilized? By promoting the use of geospatial tools, online data collection, and artificial intelligence, WCA 2030 shifts agricultural censuses from slow, paper‑based operations to more timely, spatially explicit, and data‑integrated systems. Georeferencing and Earth observation improve coverage and consistency checks, online and mobile tools accelerate data capture and reduce respondent burden, and AI‑supported processes strengthen training, data validation, editing, and linkage with administrative and survey data. Together, these technologies enable faster production of higher‑quality, interoperable census data that can be more easily reused for policy analysis, monitoring, and targeting, rather than remaining static decennial snapshots. Many developing countries face capacity and infrastructure constraints when conducting large-scale agricultural censuses. How is FAO supporting Member countries to implement WCA 2030 effectively while ensuring data quality and comparability? FAO is supporting Member countries to implement WCA 2030 by combining normative guidance with hands‑on capacity development, tailored to different national contexts. This includes disseminating harmonized methodological guidelines, providing country‑level technical assistance for census planning and implementation, and organizing regional and national training workshops to strengthen skills in modern census methods, quality assurance, and the use of innovative technologies. By anchoring support in internationally agreed standards while allowing flexible adaptation to country capacities, FAO helps reduce implementation costs, improve data quality, and ensure that census results remain internationally comparable and policy‑relevant. The guidelines highlight the growing role of women farmers, aquaculture activities, and diversified farming systems. How will WCA 2030 help governments better capture these emerging dynamics in agriculture? WCA 2030 helps governments capture these emerging agricultural dynamics by updating concepts, definitions, and census content to better reflect the realities of modern farming systems. The guidelines strengthen the measurement of women’s roles by reinforcing the identification of agricultural holders and managers, enable the systematic inclusion or combination of aquaculture and forestry activities with agricultural censuses, and recognize increasingly diversified and mixed production systems within a single holding. By embedding these elements within internationally agreed standards and modular census designs, WCA 2030 allows countries to produce more nuanced, comparable structural data that reveal who farms, what activities are combined, and how agriculture is evolving beyond traditional crop‑based models. Agricultural census data increasingly underpins national strategies on food security, climate adaptation, and rural development. How can WCA 2030 strengthen evidence-based policymaking in these areas? WCA 2030 strengthens evidence‑based policymaking by providing high‑quality, internationally comparable structural data that serve as a stable foundation for food security, climate adaptation, and rural development strategies. By standardizing information on farm structures, land use, production systems, and labour, and by integrating agricultural censuses within national statistical systems, WCA 2030 enables governments to better target vulnerable areas and populations, design climate‑resilient interventions, and monitor structural change over time. The use of census data as a frame for follow‑up surveys further allows countries to link long‑term structural trends with faster‑changing policy variables, improving the coherence and credibility of policy decisions. With the introduction of anonymized microdata and interactive data dissemination tools, how does FAO envision expanding access to agricultural data for researchers, agribusinesses, and investors? Under WCA 2030, FAO envisages expanding access to agricultural data by promoting safe access to anonymized census microdata alongside modern, interactive dissemination tools that go beyond traditional tabulations. By encouraging countries to release anonymized microdata and by disseminating standardized structural census data through platforms such as FAOSTAT and microdata catalogues, FAO enables researchers, agribusinesses, and investors to conduct deeper, customized analyses while safeguarding confidentiality. Interactive web‑based tables, maps, and visualization tools further lower access barriers, allowing a wider range of users to explore agricultural structures, identify investment opportunities, and support innovation‑driven decision‑making based on official, high‑quality data. The WCA 2030 outlines 27 essential data items for all countries. How were these core indicators selected, and how do they reflect the evolving priorities of modern agriculture and food systems? The 27 essential data items in WCA 2030 were selected through extensive review of country experiences, expert consultations, and global user needs to define a minimum, universally relevant core dataset that all countries can collect through complete enumeration. These indicators focus on the fundamental structural characteristics of agricultural holdings—such as land, production activities, labour, and management—ensuring international comparability while remaining operationally feasible. At the same time, their composition reflects evolving priorities of modern agriculture by strengthening attention to gender roles, diversified production systems, and the integration of agriculture with forestry and aquaculture, positioning the census as a foundation for understanding structural transformation in contemporary food systems. Looking ahead to 2030 and beyond, what role do you see agricultural census data playing in tracking progress toward global commitments such as the Sustainable Development Goals and climate targets? Looking ahead to 2030 and beyond, agricultural census data under WCA 2030 will serve as a structural backbone for tracking progress toward the SDGs and climate commitments by providing consistent, comparable baselines on farm structures, land use, labour, and production systems. The census of agriculture supports the statistical system that monitors agricultural-related SDGs and provides the sampling frame for the agricultural survey programme and a benchmark for the national agricultural statistical system. Altogether allow countries to identify who is at risk of being left behind, monitor long‑term structural change relevant to food security and rural livelihoods, and anchor climate‑related indicators—such as exposure, adaptive capacity, and land management—within national statistical systems. By linking decennial census benchmarks with inter‑censal surveys and other data sources, WCA 2030 enables more credible monitoring of transformation pathways rather than one‑off reporting against global targets. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3622/digitizing-farm-balance-sheet-rwas-and-future-of-agri-finance.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3622/digitizing-farm-balance-sheet-rwas-and-future-of-agri-finance.html Tue, 10 Mar 2026 17:18:57 +0530 In an exclusive conversation with AgroSpectrum, Dimitra Founder & CEO Jon Trask explains why tokenized real-world assets, blockchain-backed MRV and carbon markets could reshape global agricultural finance Jon Trask discusses how tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) are transitioning from speculative blockchain experiments into institutional-grade financial infrastructure for agriculture. Drawing from Dimitra’s work across emerging markets and its collaboration with MANTRA, Trask highlights how verified farm data, MRV frameworks, and blockchain technology can convert agricultural production, carbon credits, and supply-chain outputs into investable digital assets. He explains that tokenization can address agriculture’s historic paradox of being asset-rich but liquidity-poor, enabling farmers and cooperatives to access new capital pools while improving transparency for investors. The interview also explores the operational realities of scaling agricultural RWAs—from satellite monitoring and IoT-driven data validation to governance structures required for institutional compliance. Looking ahead, Trask argues that tokenized agriculture will likely become part of the core financial infrastructure of global food systems, enabling climate-aligned capital and more efficient, data-driven agricultural markets. At Consensus Hong Kong, industry heavyweights signaled that tokenized real-world assets have crossed from speculation into structural utility. From your vantage point in agriculture, what evidence convinces you that RWAs are entering a long-term institutional cycle rather than a hype-driven one?  The clearest signal we see is the replacement of speculative interest with structural pressure, but in agriculture that pressure is now tied to a very specific outcome: turning physical production into an investable, financeable digital asset. Traceability and MRV can exist without an RWA, but an RWA becomes the bridge between “proof” and “capital” by packaging verified production, performance, and delivery rights into a standardized instrument that institutions can underwrite. Tokenized agricultural RWAs backed by verifiable data help in three concrete ways. First, they make financing underwritable: when the asset is linked to auditable farm and supply-chain records, investors can price risk and deploy capital against real collateral or forward flows (inventory, receivables, offtake agreements), rather than relying on informal guarantees. Second, they improve enforceability and transparency: the same data that supports traceability becomes the evidence layer for covenants, performance triggers, and monitoring, reducing fraud risk and transaction costs for lenders and development finance. Third, they broaden access: producers and cooperatives can use standardized, data-backed RWAs to reach new pools of capital like institutions, development banks, and corporates seeking measurable climate and supply-chain outcomes, without requiring each financier to rebuild due diligence from scratch. Conversations in this space have also shifted. Now, instead of focusing solely on token mechanics, investors want to know about MRV (Measurement, Reporting, and Verification) standards, risk frameworks, legal enforceability, and alignment with emerging carbon and sustainability regulations, because those are the prerequisites for financing at scale. This shift tells us the market is maturing: less about short-term trading incentives, and more about building the infrastructure that converts verified agricultural activity into long-term institutional-grade investment products. Agriculture has always been asset-rich but liquidity-poor. How does bringing farmland, inputs, harvests, and carbon credits on-chain fundamentally alter capital formation for producers—especially in emerging markets?  Agriculture has historically been asset-rich but liquidity-poor because the real economic value of land, inputs, outputs, and ecosystem services is difficult to quantify, verify, and transact, especially for smallholder farmers operating under strained and unpredictable conditions. By bringing agricultural assets on-chain, we can capture, verify, and mobilize that value in ways traditional systems have struggled to do, particularly for farmers. When farmland, inputs, harvests, and carbon credits are recorded on-chain, they become trusted and verifiable digital assets that can be tokenized, used as collateral, traded, or tied to performance-based financing. This on-chain asset representation enables farmers to monetize not only what they grow, but how they grow it, unlocking new pathways to climate finance and scalable capital formation. This is particularly true in emerging markets, where producers often lack formal credit histories.  It also moves agriculture beyond a financing model tied only to yield and land value. For instance, carbon credits become liquid climate assets. This, in itself, allows producers to diversify their financing. So, while investors are presented with the opportunity to fund climate-positive agriculture, producers are rewarded for adopting sustainable practices that generate verified, tradeable value. Your partnership with MANTRA aimed to verify carbon credits and tokenize agricultural assets across South America. What did that initiative reveal about institutional appetite for on-chain agricultural RWAs—and the operational hurdles of executing at regional scale?  The partnership with MANTRA revealed that institutional appetite for on-chain agricultural RWAs is real, but highly conditional—and it is becoming more real as projects move from pilots into execution. Investors engage when assets are backed by verifiable data, clear governance, and measurable outcomes, particularly around carbon integrity and sustainability metrics. The conversation is no longer about tokenization as a concept; it is about whether the underlying infrastructure and the legal/financial structure are credible enough to support real-world adoption at scale. It also made clear that, beyond technology, we must offer an opportunity where investors are willing to assume the risk in a way that fits their mandate. In practice, that means structuring investable products with clear risk allocation, enforceable rights, and monitoring-based controls, often combining traceability, MRV, and real cash-flow or collateral mechanisms. This takes time, and institutions typically require iteration on the structure, documentation, and governance as the project advances, and adjustments are often needed along the process as field realities, regulatory requirements, and data maturity become clearer. Executing at regional scale highlighted how operationally complex agriculture still is. Across South America, producers operate under different regulatory environments, data standards, and levels of digital maturity. Verifying carbon credits or tokenizing agricultural assets requires strong MRV frameworks, consistent data collection methodologies, and ground-level partnerships. Technology is only one part of the equation; alignment between farmers, cooperatives, regulators, and other stakeholders, plus the patience to refine the structure over time, is what turns on-chain RWAs into scalable, institutional-grade deployments. Tokenization promises transparency and efficiency—but agriculture is fragmented and analog. What infrastructure layers (data validation, satellite monitoring, IoT, local governance) are essential before RWAs in farming can meet institutional compliance standards?  The crucial piece of this puzzle precedes tokenization. Before real-world agricultural assets can meet institutional compliance standards, the underlying data infrastructure must be robust, verifiable, and transparent. Without reliable ground-truth data, on-chain representation can not withstand institutional scrutiny. The next critical layer is multi-source validation. Satellite monitoring provides independent verification of land use, crop health, and deforestation risk. IoT devices and mobile agronomic tools contribute real-time insights into inputs, yields, and environmental performance. These data streams must be cross-referenced and time-stamped to create an auditable trail. Institutions require defensible MRV frameworks, meaning data must be consistent, tamper-evident, and aligned with emerging regulatory standards for carbon, sustainability, and supply chain traceability.  Finally, local governance and regulatory compliance are essential. Institutional adoption depends not only on technical integrity but also on legal certainty and local stakeholder alignment. With these three factors in place, agricultural RWAs become credible digital representations of real-world activity that can meet compliance expectations and operate at scale. Carbon markets have faced credibility challenges. How does blockchain-based verification improve integrity, and can tokenized agricultural carbon credits realistically meet the scrutiny of global regulators and institutional buyers?  Blockchain-based verification improves integrity by ensuring that once key events and evidence are recorded, they cannot be altered retroactively. That immutability is essential, but on its own it does not solve the credibility problem. The real integrity comes from robust MRV made up of sound methodologies, high-quality field data, third-party auditability, and consistent monitoring. In that context, blockchain is the final credibility layer: it anchors MRV evidence, custody, and credit lifecycle events in a tamper-resistant record, reducing disputes and making reviews faster and more defensible. At Dimitra, we build on that foundation by combining blockchain with AI, IoT, and satellite-based MRV systems so data is captured and validated as close to the source as possible and then permanently attested on-chain. This creates field-level traceability and a practical verification trail that allows institutional buyers and regulators to interrogate the methodology, monitoring outputs, audit logs, issuance, transfers, and retirement records without relying on opaque, manually curated files.  Tokenized agricultural carbon credits can meet global scrutiny, but only when they are issued under recognized standards, backed by rigorous MRV and governance, and structured to support independent auditing and regulatory reporting. In other words, blockchain is not the goal. It is the mechanism that makes strong MRV harder to tamper with and easier to trust at scale. Institutional investors are now seeking yield tied to real economic activity. How does agricultural RWA tokenization compare—on risk, volatility, and return profile—to traditional agri-finance instruments?  For investors, agriculture has always offered yield anchored in productive, real-world activity. However, traditional agri-finance instruments have historically relied on fragmented reporting, periodic audits, and opaque risk assessment. In comparison, Tokenized RWAs, when built on verified field data, satellite monitoring, and blockchain technology, allow risk to be measured continuously. While this doesn’t mitigate the risks inherent to agricultural output (i.e., weather, disease, geopolitical tension), it facilitates greater transparency, which can reduce fraud risk and enable more dynamic risk pricing. Especially in emerging markets, where perceived risk is often inflated due to limited data, structured digital verification can narrow the risk premium and create more accurate return expectations. Ultimately, tokenization connects stakeholders more directly to real agricultural performance, improving visibility into how value is created and how risk is mitigated over time. Smallholder inclusion remains a central narrative. How do you ensure that tokenization empowers farmers with cheaper capital and better market access—rather than concentrating value among platforms and global investors?  Smallholder inclusion is not a narrative at Dimitra; it’s fundamental to our architecture, and one of the hardest parts is simply reaching farmers and sustaining participation at scale. That’s why we don’t try to “onboard farmers” in isolation. We structure projects through cooperatives, NGOs, and local organizations that farmers already trust and interact with, because those partners are essential for field operations, adoption, training, and ongoing data quality. Our approach is designed to make the value farmers already create visible, verifiable, and measurable. It starts with farmer-owned data captured at the field level and transparent value attribution, so any tokenized asset, whether tied to harvests, receivables, or carbon outcomes, originates from and is traceable to the producer, with clear rules on how value is shared. Tokenization only makes sense if it is linked to real benefits, like cheaper capital through underwritable evidence and risk reduction, and better market access by enabling compliance and buyer-ready traceability. By creating verifiable digital records at the farm level, we give farmers a structured way to document how they operate and what they produce, which lowers due diligence costs for lenders and buyers and reduces the information asymmetry that drives high financing costs. We also design governance and distribution so value doesn’t concentrate at the platform level through transparent fee structures, farmer-level attribution, and mechanisms that scale farmer upside as participation grows. The goal is a system where capital and market premiums flow back to farmers because their data and outcomes make the asset investable, not a system where tokenization becomes an extractive layer on top of their work. Regulatory clarity around digital assets is still evolving. What jurisdictions are best positioned to lead in agricultural RWAs, and how critical is harmonized global policy for scaling cross-border tokenized commodity markets?  In order to achieve impactful adoption and scale effectively, we believe in evaluating each jurisdiction on an individual basis. This means taking the social, legal, political, geographical, and cultural context of each individual jurisdiction into careful, specific consideration, as opposed to broadly cross-comparing landscapes.  While we also appreciate that full global harmonization of policy would accelerate adoption, we are not naive to the fact that the probability of this in the short term is low and will probably take many years to achieve. In the interim, we must accept the current reality with patience and work within the confines of each country’s legislative and regulatory boundaries. Looking ahead five to ten years, do you see tokenized agriculture becoming core infrastructure for global food systems finance —or a parallel alternative market serving climate-aligned capital pools?   I believe that tokenized agriculture will become part of the core infrastructure rather than a parallel alternative market. Agricultural systems are already moving towards greater transparency, traceability, and data-driven compliance. Tokenization is a practical way to make those systems more interoperable and verifiable. It won’t replace existing markets overnight, but it will increasingly sit alongside them as a digital layer that improves how agricultural activity is recorded, verified, and exchanged across global supply chains. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3621/safety-science-behind-cultivated-meat.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3621/safety-science-behind-cultivated-meat.html Mon, 09 Mar 2026 14:44:03 +0530 Dr. William Chen discusses NAMs, AI, and the future of risk assessment for cell-based foods With cultivated meat emerging as one of the most promising innovations in alternative proteins, regulators and scientists worldwide are working to establish robust safety frameworks for these novel foods. Unlike conventional meat, cultivated meat is produced through cell culture and advanced bioprocessing technologies, raising new questions around safety assessment, regulatory oversight, and long-term consumer exposure. In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Dr. William Chen, Michael Fam Endowed Professor at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, explains that existing regulatory systems largely focus on hazard identification within production processes, but may not fully capture the complexities of cell-based foods. He advocates for the adoption of food-relevant New Approach Methodologies (NAMs)—combined with AI-driven predictive toxicology and systems biology—to enable more comprehensive risk assessment while supporting innovation and global regulatory harmonization. Cultivated meat challenges decades of conventional food safety doctrine. Are existing risk assessment frameworks fundamentally fit for purpose—or do they require a regulatory reset built specifically for cell-based systems? The main challenge for cultivated meat industry is to scale up. The scale up is not just about producing more animal cells (these are not muscle cells like in the meat) in the bioreactor, but to produce large amount of differentiated muscle cells that function like meat. Current application dossier for regulatory approval generally focuses more on the production system (bioreactor), including contaminations in culture medium from the environment (microbes) or new components from replacement of animal serum by various substances. My sense is that this is important but it remains as providing a list of potential hazards without any proper risk assessment (importantly: Hazard May Not Be Risk). The listing of the potential hazards is currently followed by searching what has been known about their risk profile from the existing publications, rather than assessing their risk by proper technology (see NAMs in the later part of my comments). More attention should be placed in the safety assessment of differentiated muscle cells, starting with the emerging New Approach Methodologies (NAMs). This is an animal-free in vitro testing system developed for risk assessment of cosmetics and environment pollutants. New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) are gaining traction in pharmaceuticals and toxicology. How can NAMs—such as in vitro assays, computational modeling, and omics-based profiling—be credibly adapted for cultivated meat safety validation? Many are trying to simply apply such NAMs (including in vitro assays, computational modeling, and omics-based profiling) to food safety risk assessment. However, there are two fundamental differences between food and cosmetics/environment pollutants: mixture (foods seldom exist as one ingredient) and digestion (enzymes in the digestive system break down food through hydrolysis which change the potential toxicity and allergenicity in foods). For reference, risk assessment of cosmetics and environment pollutants usually deals with single molecules which do not go through our digestive system. These two differences need to be reflected in the food-relevant NAMs for the data interpretation of food safety risk assessment to be useful and meaningful. The production process is the product. In cultivated meat, where bioprocessing conditions shape final composition, how should regulators evaluate variability across cell lines, growth media, and scaffold materials? Proper application of food-relevant NAMs should generate differential risk assessment data based on the conditions of cultivated meat product (cell lines, growth media, and scaffold materials). Again, most of current literature and published papers on cultivated meat stays at the stage of Hazard Identification, which is the first step of flow risk assessment. NAMs application is moving the needle as we are now talking about Hazard Characterization. There are 2 other important components involving consumers for the proper food safety assessment: Exposure Assessment and Risk Characterization. But food-relevant NAMs represents an important step forward to cultivated meat safety risk assessment. Transparency versus proprietary protection remains a tension. How can companies safeguard intellectual property while providing regulators with sufficient data for rigorous, science-based risk assessment? Companies may provide cultivated meat product for NAMs analysis through a neutral party (for example, Singapore Future-Ready Food Safety Hub – FRESH). Regulatory approval would now shift to analysing the risk assessment data generated from the NAMs, rather then scrutinizing the list of components in the respective cultivated meat production, as such list is still the hazard identification but means little to the safety risk assessment. This shift would then help company protect their IP to a large extent.   Global regulatory divergence is emerging. With Singapore among the first movers in approving cultivated meat, what lessons can other jurisdictions draw from its science-driven framework—and where are harmonization gaps widening? Working with global organizations (FAO, WHO among others) would help us bridge the gap in global regulatory divergence. One example is the Joint Action Plan between WHO and NTU Singapore on NAMs application in novel foods. Through the joint action  plan, there would be greater communications on work done in Singapore and provide greater transparency for discussion and collaboration among regulatory agencies. This would then contribute to the harmonization of the food safety risk assessment  across different countries. Public trust is as critical as scientific validation. What role should independent academic labs and open-data consortia play in stress-testing safety claims and avoiding regulatory capture? Having a neutral and trusted party such as FRESH involved in the food safety risk assessment, trusted with its technology innovations and partnerships with stakeholders in both public and private sectors, would enhance public trust. Long-term exposure data for novel proteins is inherently limited. How can predictive toxicology, AI-driven modeling, and systems biology reduce uncertainty without delaying innovation? While food-relevant NAMs is a huge step forward to food safety risk assessment, it is not the holy grail for the novel food safety assurance. What NAMs does is more or less like a first round of fast and cost-effective profiling of potential risks in an in vitro setting.  As it is animal-free, exposure studies in consumers are needed to validate the NAMs data but much less in sample size. Once in the consumer setting, variability in consumer profile (genetic makeup, composition of gut microbiome) and the resulting data would increase dramatically. Here machine learning tools combined with systems biology approach would be extremely important for the predictive toxicology. Looking a decade ahead, do you foresee cultivated meat safety assessments becoming more dynamic and real-time—embedded within digital bioprocess monitoring systems—rather than relying solely on static pre-market approvals? Certainly. Current pre-market approval process are also evolving with the advances in technology. Through the ongoing collaboration between the Singapore Food Agency and FRESH, I see a huge potential in moving the cultivated meat safety risk assessment from the current way of hazard identification (list of potential hazards and evaluate their potential risk based on what others have done in a different context, e.g. most likely environmental pollutants) to food-relevant characterization (NAMs) to exposure assessment. More importantly, proper risk assessment of cultivated meat product should be expanded in hybrid food products where cultivated meat is an ingredient. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agropsectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3618/24-mile-chokepoint-that-moves-world.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3618/24-mile-chokepoint-that-moves-world.html Thu, 05 Mar 2026 18:17:20 +0530 Tensions around the Strait of Hormuz are rattling oil markets, disrupting shipping networks and exposing fragile fertilizer supply chains that underpin global food production The narrow waters of the Strait of Hormuz have long been one of the world’s most strategically sensitive maritime corridors. Now, as tensions flare across the Middle East following unprecedented joint military strikes by the United States and Israel on Iran, the waterway has once again emerged as the epicenter of a rapidly escalating global economic shock. Oil prices are climbing. Shipping companies are scrambling to reroute vessels. Freight costs and insurance premiums are surging. And fertilizer markets—already fragile—are bracing for another wave of volatility. For countries like India, which depend heavily on both Middle Eastern energy and imported agricultural inputs, the repercussions could ripple far beyond energy markets, touching everything from food production and agricultural costs to inflation and trade logistics. The crisis underscores a stark reality of the global economy: a sliver of water barely 24 miles wide can still dictate the fortunes of nations. A Strategic Chokepoint Under Pressure Stretching roughly 100 miles between Iran in the north and the coastlines of Oman and the United Arab Emirates in the south, the Strait of Hormuz has long occupied a singular place in the architecture of the global energy system. Few geographic features exert such disproportionate influence over the world economy. On a map it appears as little more than a thin ribbon of water separating the Persian Gulf from the open ocean. In reality, it functions as one of the most consequential arteries of global commerce. Disruption or heightened risk in the Strait of Hormuz can significantly affect India’s agri trade flows, as fertilizers, sulphur, phosphoric acid and other critical inputs face longer transit times, higher freight rates and insurance premiums. Sulphur prices are especially vulnerable, since a large share of global sulphur is recovered from Middle Eastern oil and gas processing; any slowdown or shipping disruption can tighten supply and spike prices for sulphur-based fertilizers. For India, this translates into higher nutrient costs, pressure on fertilizer subsidies, and potential delays during key sowing seasons. The overall risk is not a shortage-driven crisis, but a cost- and timing-driven shock to agricultural supply chains. --- Dr Rahul Mirchandani, Chairman, Aries Agro At its narrowest point, the strait measures just 24 miles across—barely the distance of a short highway commute. Yet through this slender maritime corridor flows close to 20 percent of the world’s crude oil supply, an extraordinary concentration of energy trade passing through a single chokepoint. Every day, vast fleets of tankers carrying millions of barrels of oil move through these waters, transporting crude from the Persian Gulf’s dominant producers—Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates—toward energy-hungry economies in Asia, Europe and beyond. The significance of the strait lies not only in the volume of oil that moves through it, but in the absence of credible alternatives. Pipelines exist that bypass the corridor, including routes across Saudi Arabia and the UAE, yet their combined capacity falls far short of replacing the immense flow handled by maritime tankers. The geography of the region has effectively locked the global energy system into dependence on this narrow passage. That dependence transforms the strait into something more than a shipping lane—it becomes a pressure point where geopolitics and economics intersect. Any disruption, whether from military confrontation, maritime blockades, sabotage or even heightened security threats, reverberates far beyond the Gulf. Traders, insurers and shipping companies monitor developments in the strait with extraordinary sensitivity because even small risks can translate into immediate market reactions. “Exports to the Middle East are effectively on hold for now as shipping companies reassess security risks in the Gulf. Carriers are likely to impose additional insurance and war-risk surcharges, which will inevitably make imports more expensive. If the situation persists, the combined effect of higher freight costs, longer transit times and elevated insurance premiums could significantly raise the cost of fertilizers and other agricultural inputs for countries like India.” ---- Rajib Chakraborty, National President, SFIA History has repeatedly shown how fragile this equilibrium can be. Periods of tension in the Gulf—from the tanker wars of the 1980s to more recent confrontations between regional powers—have demonstrated how quickly shipping routes can become contested and how rapidly energy markets respond. Today, that sensitivity remains acute. Analysts warn that even the threat of closure—without a single tanker being physically blocked—could push crude prices sharply higher as traders price in the possibility of disrupted supply. Some estimates suggest that oil could surge toward $108 per barrel if shipments through the strait were significantly curtailed. Recent movements in energy markets suggest investors are already factoring in that risk. The mere possibility of instability in the Strait of Hormuz is enough to ripple through futures markets, insurance premiums and freight rates, underscoring how profoundly the global economy still depends on the safe passage of ships through a corridor barely two dozen miles wide. In an era defined by complex supply chains and interconnected markets, the world’s energy lifeline still runs through one narrow stretch of water—and the consequences of instability there rarely remain confined to the region. Oil Markets React Global crude markets wasted little time registering the shock. As geopolitical tensions escalated across the Gulf, oil prices moved almost instantly, reflecting how sensitive energy markets remain to developments around the Strait of Hormuz. Futures linked to West Texas Intermediate crude surged more than 6 percent, climbing above $71 per barrel—their highest level in over eight months. At one stage during trading, prices spiked nearly 10 percent, a sharp intraday surge that underscored the market’s growing anxiety about potential supply disruptions. Yet traders say the rally is not driven by immediate shortages of crude. Rather, it reflects a rapidly expanding geopolitical risk premium—the additional cost markets attach to the possibility that instability in the Persian Gulf could threaten one of the world’s most vital energy corridors. The Gulf remains the epicenter of global oil exports. When tensions rise in a region responsible for such a large share of global supply, markets react with remarkable speed. Shipping data already suggests that tanker operators are recalibrating their strategies—adjusting routes, revising security protocols, and factoring higher risk into charter rates. As insurers reassess exposure in a potential conflict zone, maritime insurance premiums are also beginning to climb. For oil-importing economies, the implications are immediate and unavoidable. Rising freight costs, higher insurance charges and a swelling geopolitical risk premium combine to push energy bills upward, transmitting the shock from the Gulf directly into global inflation and trade flows. India’s Energy Vulnerability Few economies illustrate the stakes of Gulf instability more starkly than India. Roughly half of India’s crude oil imports—between 2.5 and 2.7 million barrels per day—move through the Strait of Hormuz, making the narrow corridor one of the most critical arteries in the country’s energy supply chain. These shipments originate largely from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait—producers that together anchor India’s long-standing energy relationship with the Persian Gulf. Any sustained disruption to maritime traffic through the strait would therefore reverberate quickly through India’s economy. The country’s vast refining sector remains deeply intertwined with Middle Eastern crude flows. Although New Delhi has diversified supply in recent years—most notably by ramping up purchases from Russia—the Gulf continues to form the backbone of its energy strategy. A surge in crude prices would ripple through the economy with speed. Fuel costs feed directly into transportation networks, manufacturing supply chains and logistics, amplifying inflationary pressures across sectors. In a country where energy prices carry both economic and political sensitivity, volatility in the Gulf rarely remains confined to commodity markets for long. Yet oil is only one layer of the vulnerability. The same sea lanes that carry crude tankers also support a sprawling web of container shipping, agricultural commodities and fertilizer shipments—cargoes that are just as critical to India’s economic stability and food security as energy itself. Shipping Lines Pull Back Long before any formal closure of sea lanes, the global shipping industry has begun behaving as though the risk is already real. As tensions rise around the Strait of Hormuz and the wider Persian Gulf, some of the world’s largest container carriers are quietly redrawing their maritime maps—suspending cargo bookings, rerouting vessels and issuing emergency advisories to fleets navigating one of the world’s most critical trade corridors. The response has been swift and coordinated. The Geneva-based shipping giant MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company announced on March 1 that it was suspending all bookings for worldwide cargo bound for the Middle East until further notice, a move that effectively freezes a significant portion of container traffic headed toward Gulf ports. Meanwhile, Danish logistics powerhouse Maersk confirmed that two of its major shipping services—ME11 and MECL, which connect the Middle East and India with Mediterranean and U.S. markets—would be rerouted around the Cape of Good Hope. While safer, the diversion dramatically extends sailing distances between Asia, Europe and the Americas, adding days—sometimes weeks—to global shipping schedules. France’s maritime heavyweight CMA CGM has taken an even more sweeping step. Citing escalating operational and security constraints, the company halted all refrigerated container bookings for a wide swath of Middle Eastern destinations including Iraq, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen, Qatar, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt (Port of Ain Sokhna), Djibouti, Sudan and Eritrea. Across the Gulf itself, caution has hardened into operational directives. China’s state-backed carrier COSCO Shipping has instructed vessels already inside the Gulf to proceed to safer waters and remain on standby until security conditions stabilize. German shipping line Hapag‑Lloyd—the world’s fifth-largest container shipping company—has gone further still, suspending all transit through the strait. Ships already operating within the Gulf have reportedly been ordered to seek shelter and await further instructions. Taken together, these moves amount to a quiet but profound shift in global maritime behavior. Without a single official blockade being declared, the shipping industry is already acting as though one of the world’s most vital trade corridors has become dangerously uncertain. Freight Costs Begin to Spike As vessels quietly alter their routes and insurers reassess the risks of operating in a rapidly militarizing maritime corridor, the financial consequences are already rippling through global shipping markets. Freight rates are beginning to climb. Shipping companies have introduced what is known as an Emergency Conflict Surcharge (ECS)—a temporary levy designed to compensate carriers for the sharply elevated risks of operating near the Strait of Hormuz and the wider Persian Gulf. The new charges are steep and immediate. Current ECS levels include $2,000 per 20-foot container, $3,000 per 40-foot container, and $4,000 for refrigerated or specialized containers, the latter particularly significant for food, pharmaceutical and agricultural shipments that depend on temperature-controlled transport. These surcharges are only part of the emerging cost structure. Maritime insurers are simultaneously recalibrating risk assessments for ships entering Gulf waters, prompting additional War Risk Surcharges across multiple routes. German carrier Hapag-Lloyd has already confirmed the introduction of such fees, setting charges at $1,500 per TEU for standard containers and $3,500 per container for refrigerated units and specialized equipment. For exporters and importers, the financial arithmetic escalates quickly. Every additional surcharge compounds the cost of moving goods through already strained supply chains. Longer detours around the Cape of Good Hope increase fuel consumption and voyage durations, while rising insurance premiums add another layer of expense. The result is a mounting logistical squeeze that many trade analysts say is beginning to resemble the cascading disruptions witnessed during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic—when shipping delays, container shortages and freight inflation reverberated across the global economy. In today’s case, however, the trigger is not a virus but geopolitics—and a narrow maritime corridor whose instability can still reshape the economics of global trade. Port Disruptions and Regional Bottlenecks The stress is not confined to oil tankers and container vessels navigating the narrow waters of the Strait of Hormuz. It is increasingly visible across the wider logistics architecture of the Gulf, where some of the world’s most important trade hubs are beginning to feel the strain. At the center of this network lies Jebel Ali Port—one of the largest container transshipment complexes on the planet and a crucial redistribution gateway linking Asia, Africa and Europe. Reports indicate that the port has experienced temporary operational halts following conflict-related blasts and debris incidents in the region, forcing precautionary pauses in port activity. Even short disruptions at such strategic hubs can send shockwaves through global supply chains. Ports like Jebel Ali operate as the logistical heartbeat of the Gulf’s “free-zone” trade ecosystem, where cargo arriving from Asia is redistributed onward to markets across the Middle East, Africa and the Mediterranean. When these nodes slow down—even briefly—the consequences propagate outward through shipping schedules, container availability and delivery timelines. For exporters thousands of miles away, the effects can be immediate. Indian exporters who rely heavily on Gulf transshipment routes warn that the growing instability could lengthen transit times and inject fresh uncertainty into key export corridors connecting South Asia with Europe and Africa. Delays at a single hub can cascade through multiple supply chains, forcing cargo to wait for connecting vessels, rerouted containers or alternative port calls. Air logistics may offer little relief. With parts of regional airspace subject to potential restrictions or heightened security oversight, cargo flights could face longer routes or operational constraints—tightening supply chains even further. Yet amid the turbulence engulfing oil markets and container shipping, one of the most consequential ripple effects may emerge in a sector far removed from tankers and port cranes. The next shock could arrive in the global fertilizer market. Fertilizer Markets Brace for Impact Beyond oil tankers and container vessels, another critical supply chain runs quietly through the waters of the Persian Gulf—one that ultimately feeds the world. The Middle East plays a pivotal role in global fertilizer production, particularly for nitrogen-based fertilizers such as urea. Countries across the region have built vast petrochemical complexes that convert natural gas into fertilizers shipped to agricultural markets around the world. Among them, Iran occupies a significant position. The country has a urea production capacity of roughly 9 million tonnes per year, exporting around 5 million tonnes annually to international markets. Iranian urea is frequently among the lowest-priced supplies globally, making it an important source for fertilizer-importing countries—including India. Any disruption to these exports—whether triggered by shipping constraints, sanctions pressure, or logistical bottlenecks across the Strait of Hormuz—can quickly ripple through global fertilizer markets. Analysts warn that instability along these maritime routes could push prices higher across the entire fertilizer spectrum: urea, MOP (muriate of potash), DAP (di-ammonium phosphate) and NPK fertilizers. For India, the implications are particularly significant. The country is among the world’s largest consumers of agricultural nutrients, and its food security is deeply intertwined with the reliability of international fertilizer supply chains. In the fiscal year 2024–25, India imported 160.29 lakh metric tonnes of bulk fertilizers, underscoring the enormous scale of its dependence on global trade. These imports underpin the productivity of one of the world’s largest agricultural systems—supporting everything from wheat and rice cultivation to oilseeds and horticulture. But a closer examination of India’s fertilizer import structure reveals something more consequential. Many of these supply lines run directly through the same geopolitical fault lines now emerging across the Gulf. Urea Imports and Gulf Dependence Urea dominates India’s fertilizer import basket. Total imports amount to 56.47 LMT, making it the largest category in the country’s fertilizer trade. The supply structure reveals a striking concentration in Gulf producers. Oman supplies 26.13 LMT, making it India’s largest supplier by far. Russia provides 9.23 LMT, while Saudi Arabia contributes 5.38 LMT and Qatar exports 3.70 LMT. Taken together, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Qatar account for 35.21 LMT—around 62.35 percent of India’s total urea imports. This means that nearly two-thirds of India’s most critical fertilizer flows from countries located in or near the Gulf region. If shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz were disrupted, the consequences for India’s fertilizer supply chain could be immediate. MOP Import Patterns Muriate of potash (MOP) is the second-largest fertilizer import category at 45.69 LMT. Major suppliers include Saudi Arabia (19.05 LMT) and Morocco (10.74 LMT), alongside smaller shipments from China and Jordan (2.39 LMT). Imports from Saudi Arabia and Jordan together total 21.44 LMT, representing 46.92 percent of India’s MOP imports. While this share is lower than that of urea, it still reflects a substantial reliance on suppliers connected to West Asia. DAP Supply Structure DAP imports total 35.41 LMT, and the supply structure is more geographically diversified. Russia dominates with 18.00 LMT, while Jordan supplies 3.01 LMT and Israel contributes 2.80 LMT. Gulf-region contributions are relatively smaller—5.81 LMT, or 16.41 percent of total DAP imports. This diversification provides a measure of resilience, though it also highlights Russia’s expanding role in global fertilizer supply chains. NPK Fertilizer Imports NPK fertilizer imports amount to 22.72 LMT, the smallest category among the four. Here again Russia dominates with 18.27 LMT, followed by Saudi Arabia with 3.40 LMT, while China supplies a minor share. The Gulf contribution therefore totals 3.40 LMT, accounting for 14.96 percent of India’s NPK imports. Structural Vulnerabilities in the Supply Chain Viewed together, the import data reveals a set of structural vulnerabilities that extend far beyond simple trade statistics. Beneath the numbers lies a complex web of geopolitical exposure linking India’s agricultural system to two of the world’s most strategically sensitive regions—the Persian Gulf and Russia. The most striking dependency appears in urea, where India’s reliance on Gulf suppliers exceeds 62 percent. Countries such as Oman, Saudi Arabia and Qatar together account for the overwhelming share of shipments, tying India’s most critical fertilizer directly to the stability of trade routes that pass through the Strait of Hormuz. A similar—though slightly less concentrated—pattern emerges in MOP (muriate of potash) imports. Nearly 47 percent of India’s supply originates from Gulf-linked producers, notably Saudi Arabia and Jordan. While additional supplies arrive from producers such as Morocco and China, the Gulf remains a crucial pillar of the supply chain. The picture shifts somewhat for DAP and NPK fertilizers, where the sourcing base is more geographically diversified. Here, Russia has emerged as the dominant supplier, particularly in NPK and a substantial share of DAP imports, reflecting Moscow’s growing footprint in global fertilizer markets. Yet diversification does not necessarily eliminate risk. Instead, it redistributes it across multiple geopolitical fault lines. In practical terms, India’s fertilizer supply chain now sits at the intersection of two volatile arenas. Tensions in the Gulf can disrupt maritime routes through the Strait of Hormuz. Diplomatic shifts or sanctions regimes can reshape exports from Russia. Meanwhile, the mechanics of global shipping—freight rates, insurance premiums and vessel availability—can change almost overnight when conflict alters maritime risk calculations. Each of these pressures ultimately converges in a single place: fertilizer prices. If vessels are forced onto longer routes, if insurers impose war-risk premiums, or if supply chains fragment under geopolitical strain, the cost of nutrients essential to agricultural production rises accordingly—transmitting geopolitical instability directly into the economics of farming and food production. The Global Stakes The world has faced crises in these waters before—from the tanker wars of the 1980s to the recurring standoffs between Iran and Western powers. Yet the stakes today may be even higher. Global supply chains are now more tightly interwoven than at any point in modern economic history. Energy markets respond instantly to geopolitical tremors, while food systems—often overlooked in strategic debates—depend heavily on the uninterrupted movement of fertilizers and agricultural inputs across oceans. At the center of this delicate architecture lies the Strait of Hormuz. Should tensions escalate further—or should the passage become unsafe for commercial shipping even temporarily—the consequences would extend far beyond the Middle East. Oil prices could spike sharply as traders scramble to price in supply risks. Shipping lanes could remain disrupted as vessels reroute around conflict zones, driving up freight costs and insurance premiums. Fertilizer markets, already sensitive to logistics disruptions, could tighten rapidly, amplifying pressure on global food production. The resulting shock would not remain confined to commodity markets. It would ripple outward—through inflation, trade balances and food security—reverberating across economies already strained by geopolitical fragmentation and fragile supply chains. For now, the world’s attention remains fixed on a narrow corridor of water where geopolitics, energy security and global trade converge. History offers a clear lesson: what unfolds in the Strait of Hormuz rarely stays there. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3616/ai-at-root-zone-netafims-bold-leap-with-dosing-5g.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3616/ai-at-root-zone-netafims-bold-leap-with-dosing-5g.html Wed, 04 Mar 2026 11:56:00 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Abed Masarwa, VP Products at Netafim, Israel, says the new platform marks a shift from programmable dosing to self-learning nutrient management. Abed Masarwa, describes Dosing 5G as both a major technology leap and a strategic pivot toward AI-driven autonomous fertigation, moving beyond predefined recipes to real-time adaptive nutrient management. Launched by Orbia Advance Corporation, S.A.B. de C.V.’s Precision Agriculture business, the new range—FertiKit 5G, FertiOne 5G, NetaJet 5G and NetaFlex 5G—combines advanced EC/pH sensing, auto-adaptive injection, and integration with the GrowSphere digital operating system to create a closed-loop, self-learning system. Building on six decades of agronomic expertise, Dosing 5G is designed to help farmers address rising input costs, resource scarcity, and climate volatility by maximizing yields while reducing fertilizer waste, labor, and environmental impact. Masarwa emphasizes that the long-term vision is a connected, data-driven fertigation infrastructure that balances profitability and sustainability, positioning Netafim not just as an equipment provider but as an intelligent irrigation ecosystem partner. Strategic Differentiation Netafim has led precision agriculture for decades. With Dosing 5G, what is materially different this time — is this a product upgrade, or a strategic shift toward AI-driven autonomous fertigation?Dosing 5G represents both a material technological leap and a strategic shift in how Netafim approaches autonomous fertigation. Materially, the system is built on an upgraded architecture: A next-generation controller – GrowSphere MAX – which is an intuitive and simple-to-use controller, designed to speak the grower’s language. The GrowSphere MAX also manages local and remote devices such as pumps, main valves, field valves, and other hydraulic components. A new operating system and digital workspace under GrowSphere. A new EC/pH measurement technology with faster stabilization and improved accuracy. A new auto adaptive fertilizer injection mechanism that continuously adjusts dosing based on real-time feedback. These upgrades change the way the system measures, reacts, and stabilizes nutrient delivery. Strategically, Dosing 5G flagship products mark the transition from programmable fertigation to adaptive self-learning nutrient management. While previous generations executed predefined recipes,  Dosing 5G analyzes system behavior dynamically — hydraulic performance, EC/pH response, crop stage, and environmental conditions — and adjusts in real time with minimal human intervention. AI Credibility & Data Advantage Many ag-tech firms claim AI capabilities. What proprietary data, agronomic models, or field validation give Dosing 5G a defensible advantage over competitors in automated dosing? Dosing 5G intelligence is grounded in proprietary agronomic and hydraulic data, robust crop models, and field-validated performance. At its core,  Dosing 5G’s AI capability is the combination of real-time hydraulic intelligence and continuous operational behavior learning. Dosing 5G does not rely solely on agronomic assumptions. It continuously analyzes how the irrigation and fertigation system is actually performing — pressure behavior, flow stability, injection response time, EC/pH dynamics, and valve activity. This real-time hydraulic data creates a live performance map of the system. This operational learning enables the system to adapt dosing logic dynamically, rather than simply executing pre-programmed recipes. Stabilization becomes faster, drift is reduced, and correction cycles become more precise. The result is a “closed loop” system that not only monitors performance in real time but continuously improves its response accuracy. In addition, using GrowSphere workspace enables farmers with agronomic crop modeling based ondeep agronomic expertise, real climate and soil data, and historical performance and real field feedback. These models run daily to update recommendations based on current conditions, effectively tailoring dosing to each crop’s growth stage and environment. ROI in a Cost-Pressured Market Farmers are facing rising input costs and tightening margins. What measurable return on investment can growers expect from Dosing 5G, and over what time horizon? Dosing 5G delivers ROI in 4 measurable areas: Input cost reduction Precision fertigation enables accurate, stabilized nutrient delivery directly to the root zone. By preventing over- or under-dosing and continuously optimizing application rates, growers can typically reduce fertilizer use to the desired amount. Yield & quality optimization By maintaining stable nutrient availability throughout each growth stage, Dosing 5G supports: Higher yield consistency. Improved crop uniformity. Better market-grade quality. Reduced leaching & losses Minimizing nutrient leaching and runoff means growers are not paying for fertilizer that never reaches the plant. Avoiding groundwater contamination also reduces regulatory exposure and potential compliance costs — an increasingly relevant factor in Europe and North America. Labor & Maintenance Efficiency Automation and remote control reduce manual calibration, monitoring, and troubleshooting. This lowers dependency on skilled labor and decreases system downtime. Sustainability vs. Profitability Dosing 5G promises reduced nutrient leaching and groundwater pollution. How do you quantify the environmental impact — and can sustainability gains translate into direct financial incentives for growers? As mentioned above, reduced nutrient leaching — through more direct fertilizer delivery — provides financial incentives as growers save money on fertilizer costs with lower dosage requirements. And, with reduced groundwater pollution, growers face lower regulatory exposure and compliance costs. Integration with Digital Farming How critical is integration with GrowSphere to the Dosing 5G value proposition? Is this primarily a hardware innovation, or is the long-term play software, data services, and recurring revenue? Integration with the full GrowSphere Operating System is fundamental to the Dosing 5G value proposition — it is not an optional add-on. While Dosing 5G hardware delivers precision injection and stabilization, connecting the hardware to the GrowSphere OS transforms it into a fully integrated irrigation and fertigation ecosystem that connects hydraulic control, agronomic intelligence, operational management, and data analytics in one environment The GrowSphere OS provides: A unified workspace for irrigation and fertigation planning, execution, and validation. Real-time monitoring of soil, crop, climate, and hydraulic performance. Agronomic recommendations through embedded crop models. Alerting, traceability, and season-over-season reporting. Remote access and multi-site farm management. Dosing 5G introduces new controller technology, advanced EC/pH measurement, and injection technology with the GrowSphere OS. Together, this enables: Continuous optimization based on real-time data. Cross-system learning across seasons and sites. Software-enabled service layers. Scalable digital offerings beyond hardware sales. The broader strategy is clearly platform-driven. The operating system allows Netafim to move froman equipment provider to an intelligent irrigation ecosystem partner, where data, software, and agronomic services become increasingly central to long-term value creation. Scalability Across Markets From open fields in emerging markets to high-tech greenhouses in Europe and North America, how adaptable is the Dosing 5G range across vastly different regulatory, climate, and infrastructure conditions? Dosing 5G was intentionally designed as a modular, scalable portfolio. The portfolio structure enables scalability by configuration: FertiOne 5G – A simple, cost-effective single-channel solution for bulk fertigation in open fields, pivots, and orchards. FertiKit 5G – A flexible, multi-channel open-field system (up to 6 channels) that can be tailored to farm size and complexity. NetaJet 5G – High-precision EC/pH stabilization (up to 8 channels), ideal for sensitive crops and short irrigation cycles in soil and soilless greenhouses. NetaFlex 5G – Advanced, highly uniform greenhouse mixing technology (up to 6 channels) for operations requiring very high precision. Scalability is also achieved through configuration and modularity flexibility for each product.  Also in the pipeline is The GrowSphere Flex — a FertiOne 5G soulution with a specifically designed controller tailor-made for small farmers and their real needs. Climate Volatility & Risk Management With unpredictable weather patterns intensifying, how does AI-automated dosing help farmers mitigate risk in real time — and does the system learn differently across crop types and geographies? Dosing 5G, when integrated with the GrowSphere OS and its embedded Crop Advisor capabilities, enables reactions to climate volatility. What’s more, the GrowSphere Crop Advisor leverages advanced crop models built on decades of Netafim agronomic expertise and global field validation. It combines real-time weather data, soil moisture information, hydraulic system performance, and crop growth stage modeling which allow the system to generate daily, crop-specific irrigation, and fertigation recommendations based on actual and forecasted conditions. In periods of climate stress, this translates into: Anticipating heat-driven evapotranspiration spikes and adjusting irrigation and nutrient concentration accordingly. Preventing water stress during irregular irrigation windows. Adjusting irrigation and fertigation strategies based on crop stage sensitivity. Adjusting irrigation during extreme weather events. The Competitive Landscape & Future Vision Where do you see precision fertigation heading over the next five years? Will we move toward fully autonomous nutrient management systems, and how central is Dosing 5G to Orbia Netafim’s broader AI roadmap? In the coming years, the evolution will be driven as much by software as by hardware. The continued development of the GrowSphere Workspace will expand its role from a monitoring and control interface into a comprehensive operational environment. Planning, execution, validation, reporting, and agronomic recommendations will increasingly operate in a unified digital layer. The system will not only execute fertigation strategies but support growers in designing, benchmarking, and continuously improving them. At the same time, innovation will not be limited to large high-tech operations. A major part of Netafim’s future vision is to extend advanced automated fertigation capabilities to small and medium-sized farms. By modularizing system architecture and maintaining configuration flexibility, Dosing 5G can scale in both directions — offering high and low-injection flows and high-precision greenhouse solutions while also delivering accessible, cost-effective configurations for open-field growers. The goal is to democratize intelligent fertigation rather than restrict it to premium segments. From a technical standpoint, future development will focus on increasing injection flow capacities to support larger irrigation blocks and expanding the number of dosing elements that can operate simultaneously. As farms grow in scale and nutrient programs become more sophisticated, systems must handle higher volumes and more complex fertilizer combinations without compromising stabilization speed or accuracy. The long-term vision is clear: a connected, high-capacity, data-driven fertigation infrastructure that continuously balances productivity, cost efficiency, and environmental responsibility across farm sizes and geographies. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3612/ai-enabled-agronomy-can-further-accelerate-impact-to-optimise-irrigation-and-risk-management-dr-mo-segad-2025-world-food-prize-top-agri-food-pioneer.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3612/ai-enabled-agronomy-can-further-accelerate-impact-to-optimise-irrigation-and-risk-management-dr-mo-segad-2025-world-food-prize-top-agri-food-pioneer.html Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:46:48 +0530 2025 World Food Prize – Top Agri-Food pioneer calls for nature-based, AI-enabled transformation of drylands Dr Mo Segad, a Swedish and American soil scientist and inventor, was officially recognised by the World Food Prize Foundation as one of the 39 recipients in the 2025 Top Agri-Food Pioneers (TAP) cohort. He is a distinguished professor, UNCCD-accredited expert, and globally recognised inventor whose work is redefining climate-smart and resilient desert agriculture. As founder of 3N BioTech, Pure Green AI, and a UN-accredited forestry organisation, and as a distinguished council member of the World Agriculture Forum, Dr Segad integrates AI, soil science, and regenerative practices to deliver scalable, verifiable solutions aligned with COP outcomes, NDCs, UNCCD Land Degradation Neutrality, and FAO food security mandates. In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Dr Mo Segad highlights how pioneering nano/bio soil technologies and nature-based innovations are transforming arid and degraded lands into productive, climate-resilient farms that boost food security while reducing water use, agrochemicals, and carbon emissions and use of technology such as AI in maintaining soil health. As a 2025 World Food Prize – Top Agri-Food Pioneer, how does your innovative work directly support agricultural and sustainable practices to boost national and global food security? Standing on the World Food Prize stage was a profound honor, yet a clear reminder that awards are not the measure of our work; impact is. My mission is to treat nature with nature so farmers, local communities, and Indigenous peoples can grow more organic food with less water and no agrochemicals, while restoring drylands/soils and reducing carbon emissions. From first-generation, custom-made Liquid Clays to next-generation, custom-formulated 3N BioTech, I have focused on innovative eco-engineering that delivers cost-effective, scalable, nature-based technologies to transform arid and semi-arid lands, combat water scarcity, and tackle soil salinisation in a time of climate crisis. By transforming sandy and degraded soils into living, productive lands, we can increase yields while cutting irrigation and fertiliser use, reverse desertification, and enhance soil carbon. This enables countries to expand climate-resilient organic farming without encroaching on high-biodiversity or high-emissions frontiers.  Recognition such as “Innovator of the Future” further encourages me to continue promoting credible innovation that aligns directly with COP outcomes and national commitments, advancing NDCs (emissions reductions via soil carbon and input efficiency), NAPs (adaptation through drought-resilient agriculture), UNCCD Land Degradation Neutrality, and the SDGs / CGIAR / ICARDA priorities. In short, innovation and science-led soil solutions are not an adjunct to food security; they are its foundation. How can climate-resilient desert agriculture be promoted and scaled further? We must reposition innovative desert agriculture as core adaptation, not a niche. The fastest path to scale is to treat nature with nature by deploying innovative, cost-effective, custom-made, nature-based soil and water technologies with verifiable outcomes. When arid and semi-arid lands become productive without depleting freshwater or aquifers and without expanding emissions, adaptation and food security advance together. To get there, countries should embed desert agriculture in national adaptation plans and food security strategies with clear targets to implement and deploy innovation, so that millions of hectares can be restored, water saved, salinity reduced, and farmer incomes stabilised. After decades of heavy mechanisation and agrochemical intensity, it is time to pivot to innovative, custom-formulated desert Ag solutions paired with outcome-based incentives. AI-enabled agronomy can further accelerate impact i.e. integrating AI with nature-based technologies to optimise irrigation and risk management for both smallholders and large estates. In sum: innovative nature-based AgTech, policy alignment, local production, outcome incentives, AI-enabled advisory, and catalytic finance—this is how we make desert agriculture and drylands a pillar of adaptation at national and continental scale. What is a climate solution that isn’t getting the attention or funding it deserves? Salinity reversal in drylands, along with sand-to-productive-farm transformation, is an underfunded powerhouse. Salinisation silently removes millions of hectares from production. This is why I have invented and developed custom-formulated, nature-based Ag-solutions to enhance soil structure, improve water-holding capacity, and restore biological function, addressing salinity and barren lands at their roots.  Integrated with regenerative practices (no-tillage, ground cover, and salt-tolerant rotations), these solutions rapidly restore farm productivity, save water, reduce agrochemical dependency, and unlock resilient yields—while reversing desertification and increasing soil carbon. Because these benefits cut across adaptation, mitigation, livelihoods, and water security, salinity reversal and sand-to-soil solutions deserve a central place in UNCCD Land Degradation Neutrality portfolios and climate-finance windows. How do you see integrating soil nano / biotechnology and water-retention strategies into national food security programmes while reducing dependency on unsustainable irrigation systems? Adopt and accelerate science-backed innovations and proven emerging technologies that scale what works by setting national performance standards for minimum water savings, salinity reduction, and soil organic carbon gains while keeping technology pathways open to spur innovation. Prioritise arid and semi-arid regions and saline soils, where returns on water and soil interventions are highest, and integrate custom-made nano- and bio-AgTech with drip and sensor-guided irrigation to reduce demand and stabilise yields. Practice aquifer stewardship by linking on-farm water savings to basin-level caps, recharge programmes, and equitable allocation frameworks so that efficiency gains translate into aquifer recovery rather than rebound extraction. This approach embeds high-integrity soil and water outcomes into national food security strategies, reduces dependence on unsustainable irrigation, and builds resilience where it is needed most. At recent COP and FAO forums, fertiliser sustainability has emerged as both a climate and geopolitical issue. How do nano-based and bio-enabled fertiliser systems contribute to reducing emissions, improving efficiency, and strengthening fertiliser security for importing nations? Recently, I was globally recognised by the World Food Prize Foundation for two decades of pioneering work in soil nanotechnology. Treating nature with nature is central to our transition pathway. Nano- and bio-enabled systems deliver nutrients more precisely and rebuild soil function—while reducing costs and risk.  Importantly, nano-fertilisers and nano-formulations synchronise nutrient release with plant demand and root uptake, cutting runoff, leaching, and GHG emissions from over-application. Demand is rising for organic nano-fertilisers compatible with regenerative agriculture, and for bio-enabled inputs (microbial consortia, biostimulants) that offer soil-health co-benefits while reducing embedded emissions from production and long-haul transport. Bottom line: this is more than “greener fertiliser.” It is a resilience strategy that aligns food security, climate targets, farm profitability, and national sovereignty over critical inputs, accelerating the transition to climate-smart, soil-healthy, and supply-secure agriculture.As soil carbon sequestration gains traction in voluntary and compliance markets, what safeguards, measurement standards, and governance are needed to ensure integrity, prevent greenwashing, and protect smallholders—and what financing mechanisms can rapidly scale land restoration and climate-smart agriculture?My approach is simple: innovation, foresight, transparency, and accountability ... or nothing. That’s why we’re launching Pure Green AI: a human-in-the-loop, blockchain-powered foresight, peer-review, and validation platform that predicts environmental risks, verifies soil and ecosystem outcomes, and eliminates greenwashing by anchoring projects to globally recognised standards.  Pure Green AI combines predictive, standardised AI tools with immutable audit trails to guide science-backed interventions across soil carbon, climate-smart farming, mangrove, forestry, and biodiversity projects. With tokenised, results-based finance, we unlock funding only after verified impact, scaling innovative, nature-based solutions with integrity; transforming degraded soils into fertile farmland; accelerating transparent eco-restoration; and building resilient landscapes and smart cities. In short: Blended and green finance should fund scale-up, de-risking early adoption, expanding local production capacity, and financing tree-planting and eco-restoration projects that recharge water cycles and build climate resilience. Pure Green AI is a credible end-to-end operating system and smart oracle for measurable, financeable, and fraud-resistant eco-restoration—where projects, people, and nature thrive together. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3590/is-snap-built-to-overspend-cato-says-yes.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3590/is-snap-built-to-overspend-cato-says-yes.html Fri, 20 Feb 2026 14:59:31 +0530 Why Cato believes reforms from the Republican Study Committee stop short of true fiscal reform The Republican Study Committee has advanced a slate of SNAP reforms—tightening eligibility, eliminating broad-based categorical eligibility, barring noncitizens, strengthening quality controls, and expanding interstate data matching—to curb waste and rein in federal spending. While these measures promise meaningful savings, they largely refine compliance mechanisms without confronting the program’s deeper structural imbalance: states administer benefits that federal taxpayers overwhelmingly finance. This misalignment of authority and fiscal responsibility, critics argue, perpetuates weak incentives to aggressively prevent fraud and control long-term cost growth. A more durable solution would realign funding with governance—through block grants or full devolution—placing accountability squarely with the entities that design and operate the program. In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Romina Boccia, Director of Budget and Entitlement Policy at the Cato Institute, weighs in on the Republican Study Committee framework proposing tighter SNAP eligibility, elimination of broad-based categorical eligibility, stricter quality controls, and expanded data matching to curb waste. While she acknowledges these reforms could generate significant savings—potentially hundreds of billions over a decade—Romina argues they stop short of addressing SNAP’s core structural flaw: a federal–state financing model that divorces spending authority from fiscal responsibility. The Republican Study Committee argues that tightening eligibility and verification will curb waste in SNAP. From Cato’s perspective, are these reforms meaningful structural fixes—or incremental guardrails around a fundamentally flawed program design?  The GOP’s SNAP reforms are a step in the right direction, but they only treat the symptoms of the problem. Tightening eligibility and verification may reduce improper payments at the margin, but it doesn’t fix SNAP’s core incentive problem. The federal government pays for benefits while states administer the program, meaning states have weak incentives to control costs. Structural reform would align program management with fiscal responsibility, whether through block grants or full devolution.  The RSC estimates that eliminating broad-based categorical eligibility could save $100 billion over 10 years. Do you view BBCE as a loophole that undermines statutory intent, or as a necessary flexibility tool for states managing poverty in high-cost regions?  Broad-based categorical eligibility allows states to bypass SNAP’s statutory income and asset limits, effectively expanding eligibility beyond what Congress intended. Because the federal government finances the benefits, states can broaden access without bearing the fiscal consequences. If states want greater discretion over eligibility, they should also assume greater financial responsibility. A major pillar of the proposal would bar noncitizens from SNAP entirely. Does this approach meaningfully reduce long-term fiscal exposure, or does it risk unintended labor market and integration consequences that could increase state-level burdens?  Limiting noncitizen access to SNAP reduces federal spending. As an added political benefit, it reassures Americans that immigrants are coming to work—not to take advantage of American taxpayers. Building a wall around the welfare state, rather than around the country, can sustain public support for legal immigration that benefits Americans. The framework introduces a zero-tolerance quality control threshold for payment errors. Is stricter auditing the right lever to pull—or does it risk penalizing administrative mistakes while failing to address deeper incentive misalignments?  Eliminating the QC threshold would increase program transparency by providing a more accurate measure of how much federal taxpayer money is lost to improper payments in SNAP and tighten enforcement. But stricter auditing alone doesn’t fix SNAP’s core incentive problem. As long as federal taxpayers finance benefits, states face limited fiscal consequences for errors. Greater accountability will come from aligning program authority with funding responsibilities. You argue that states lack incentive to prevent improper payments because they do not finance SNAP benefits directly. Would converting SNAP into a block grant with state cost-sharing meaningfully reduce fraud—or simply shift fiscal risk during economic downturns?  Block-granting SNAP would give states a stronger incentive to reduce fraud, as they would no longer be able to rely on additional federal funding to finance benefit expansions or make up for improper payments resulting from lax oversight. Every dollar lost to waste would be a dollar unavailable for legitimate beneficiaries.  Under a block grant model, Congress could also allow states to carry over unspent funds and build reserves during economically strong periods—so-called rainy day funds—which they can draw from to help fund benefits during economic downturns, as is the case for the TANF block grant. However, as long as states are spending federal dollars—even with cost-sharing—some incentive distortions remain. Examples include states like California, which have resorted to using budget gimmicks to draw more federal dollars in Medicaid. Ending federal financing of SNAP benefits altogether could save over $400 billion over a decade, according to your analysis. Politically and economically, is that a realistic path forward—or a theoretical benchmark to frame the debate?  The 1996 welfare reforms demonstrated both the political viability and positive outcomes of placing greater responsibility for anti-poverty programs on the states. Full devolution is the next step and builds on that precedent. The Biden administration’s 2021 Thrifty Food Plan reevaluation increased SNAP benefits by more than 20 percent. Should Congress rescind that increase on constitutional or fiscal grounds—or would doing so risk destabilizing food security for low-income households?  Congress should rescind it on both constitutional and fiscal grounds. The Biden administration circumvented congressional spending authority and set a dangerous precedent for future unilateral executive benefit expansions. Rescinding the TFP expansion would also save taxpayers almost $300 billion over the next ten years—more than any of the SNAP-specific reforms proposed by the RSC. If Congress implements tighter eligibility rules without reforming the federal–state financing structure, will fraud and improper payments materially decline—or will states simply find new administrative workarounds within the existing incentive framework?  It might reduce payment errors by catching them more quickly, but states will still have little reason to be proactive in combating fraud because any money wasted doesn’t come out of their own coffers. Moreover, stricter verification protocols risk incentivizing states to hide improper payments to avoid financial sanctions. We saw this in 2015, when the USDA reported that 42 of 53 state SNAP agencies weakened their quality control processes to artificially lower reported payment errors. We still see this today, with states like California abusing discretionary waivers to cover up erroneously awarded benefits paid to able-bodied adults that do not meet the program’s work requirements.  --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3578/india-should-move-toward-productivity-linked-livestock-insurance-but-only-through-phased-data-anchored-evolution-ritesh-chauhan-secretary-of-animal-husbandry-govt-of-himachal-pradesh.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3578/india-should-move-toward-productivity-linked-livestock-insurance-but-only-through-phased-data-anchored-evolution-ritesh-chauhan-secretary-of-animal-husbandry-govt-of-himachal-pradesh.html Mon, 16 Feb 2026 13:14:35 +0530 Why India must move from ad-hoc compensation to a technology-enabled, trust-driven livestock protection framework that stabilises incomes and safeguards productive assets As livestock becomes an increasingly critical pillar of rural incomes amid climate and market uncertainties, the lack of effective risk protection remains a major gap in India’s agricultural policy landscape. In this exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Ritesh Chauhan, Secretary of Animal Husbandry, Government of Himachal Pradesh, explains why advances in digital identification, veterinary networks, cooperatives, and fintech now make a scalable livestock insurance framework both viable and essential. Drawing from Himachal Pradesh’s on-ground experience, he shares practical insights on building trust, improving claim settlement, and strengthening insurer participation. Edited excerpts: Why is this the right moment for India to scale up a National Livestock Insurance Scheme? India’s agricultural economy is undergoing a quiet but consequential shift—and livestock sits at the centre of this transition. As crop agriculture faces yield volatility, land fragmentation, and climate stress, livestock has emerged as the most stable and fastest-growing contributor to agri-GVA. Today, dairying, poultry, and small ruminants together account for nearly one-third of agricultural value added, growing faster than cereals or horticulture. This is not accidental: livestock offers daily cash flow, higher labour absorption, and risk diversification for smallholders in ways that seasonal cropping cannot. Yet this very backbone of rural resilience remains dangerously under-insured. Climate stress is reshaping livestock risk profiles - Heat stress is reducing milk yields, fertility, and animal longevity. Erratic monsoons and droughts are tightening fodder availability, pushing up feed costs and forcing distress sales of animals. Floods and cyclones increasingly wipe out entire herds in coastal and riverine regions. Unlike crops, livestock losses are not confined to one season; they permanently erode household productive assets and future income streams. Disease outbreaks are becoming systemic economic shocks - The spread of Lumpy Skin Disease (LSD) across multiple states since 2022 has exposed how vulnerable India’s livestock economy is to transboundary and climate-linked diseases. For households owning one or two cattle—the majority of India’s livestock keepers—the death or productivity loss of even a single animal can mean the collapse of daily income, nutrition security, and repayment capacity for micro-loans. Yet compensation remains uneven, delayed, and fiscally reactive, varying widely by state and fiscal headroom.   The success of Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) in crops and Ayushman Bharat – Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY), in health shows that large-scale, publicly backed, technology-enabled risk pooling is feasible—even in a country with fragmented landholdings and informal livelihoods.  Digital animal identification, Aadhaar-linked beneficiary databases, mobile veterinary records, satellite fodder mapping, and AI-based disease surveillance are finally converging. This makes it possible to design livestock protection systems that are actuarially sound, fraud-resistant, and low-touch for farmers. Waiting longer only raises fiscal exposure, as climate and disease risks compound. Moving now enables a paradigm shift—from relief to resilience - Without structured livestock risk protection, governments will continue to rely on ad-hoc compensation after disasters and outbreaks—often delayed, politically negotiated, and fiscally inefficient. A national or federated livestock insurance and protection framework would instead stabilise rural incomes, protect productive assets, and crowd in private insurers, agri-fintech and veterinary networks. At this inflection point, livestock is no longer a peripheral subsector—it is core economic infrastructure. If India is serious about building climate-resilient agriculture and doubling real farm incomes, integrating livestock into its formal risk-management architecture is not optional. It is the logical next step in the evolution of India’s welfare and productivity state. How can a formal insurance architecture strengthen rural financial resilience? In the absence of formal risk protection, livestock-owning households fall back on informal coping mechanisms—moneylenders, distress sale of animals, or emergency borrowing through SHGs. These options are slow, costly, and often value-destructive. High interest rates, delayed access to funds, and forced liquidation of productive animals turn a temporary shock into a long-term income loss. Once an animal is sold or dies without compensation, rebuilding the herd can take years, pushing families deeper into debt and vulnerability. Formal livestock insurance fundamentally alters this equation. By protecting the household balance sheet, it enables faster replacement of lost animals and prevents irreversible erosion of productive assets. Timely payouts ensure continuity of milk production, which for millions of families functions as daily cashflow—covering food, school expenses, and loan repayments. This income stability is critical in cushioning households against climate and disease shocks. Equally important, insured livestock becomes bankable collateral. When animals are formally insured and tagged, banks and MFIs are more willing to extend working capital and productivity loans, crowding in institutional credit and reducing dependence on informal lenders. In this way, livestock insurance is not merely a safety net—it is an enabler of rural financial inclusion, resilience, and growth. Which success elements should be adapted for livestock? Three design elements from India’s existing risk-protection programmes are clearly transferable to livestock—provided they are adapted to biological and market realities rather than copied mechanically. First, cluster-based tendering enables better risk pooling and pricing. Instead of fragmented, district-by-district coverage, clustering animals by agro-climatic zones, disease risk profiles, and production systems allows insurers to diversify exposure and price risk more accurately. Larger, well-defined pools reduce adverse selection, lower premiums, and make participation commercially viable for insurers while keeping subsidies fiscally efficient for governments. Second, a unified national digital platform is essential. A single backbone integrating animal identification, owner KYC, enrolment, premium subsidy flow, veterinary records, and claims processing can dramatically reduce friction and fraud. Mobile-based reporting, geo-tagged mortality verification, and integration with state animal husbandry databases would enable faster, more transparent settlements—critical for households dependent on daily milk income. Third, enforceable service-level agreements create trust and accountability. Clear timelines for enrolment, disease reporting, claim verification, and payout—backed by penalties for non-performance—are non-negotiable. Without strong SLAs, insurance degenerates into delayed relief. With them, livestock protection becomes a predictable, farmer-centric instrument. Together, these elements form a scalable blueprint—one that respects livestock’s unique risks while leveraging India’s hard-won institutional learning. How ready is India for RFID, biometrics, or muzzle‑printing? India is no longer starting from scratch on livestock identification. Ear-tagging and RFID are already deployed at scale under national and state programmes, while pilots on advanced biometrics—such as muzzle-printing and image-based identification—are steadily improving accuracy and field viability. The immediate priority is not inventing new technology, but establishing a tamper-resistant, unique animal ID that can serve as the backbone of the livestock ecosystem. This ID must be seamlessly integrated with AgriStack, the National Digital Livestock Mission (NDLM), vaccination and disease surveillance databases, and formal credit systems. When an animal’s identity, health history, ownership, and insurance status sit on a common digital rail, risk assessment, claims verification, and credit underwriting become faster, cheaper, and more credible. Equally critical is the human interface. Para-veterinarians, cooperative staff, and extension workers are the system’s frontline. They need simple, offline-capable, field-friendly tools to record vaccinations, disease events, mortality, and distress sales—triggering claims or alerts in real time without paperwork or discretion. In this context, technology is an enabler, not the solution. The real challenge is ecosystem design: aligning incentives across farmers, vets, insurers, banks, and states so that data capture is trusted, participation is rewarded, and protection becomes automatic rather than exceptional. How can digital workflows transform credibility? Rebuilding trust in livestock protection hinges less on promises and more on verifiable system behaviour. Four operational levers are critical. First, geo-tagged, time-stamped enrolment and event capture. Photographic proof at enrolment—linked to animal ID, owner KYC, and location—creates a clear baseline and sharply reduces disputes. Similar capture at vaccination, illness, or mortality ensures objective evidence from the field, not post-fact claims. Second, rule-based and transparent claim algorithms. Claims must be processed through clearly defined, publicly disclosed logic—triggered by verified events, disease status, and coverage rules. Removing discretion shortens settlement cycles and eliminates perceptions of bias or arbitrariness. Third, visible and time-bound processing stages. Every step—intimation, verification, approval, and payout—should be trackable by farmers through SMS or WhatsApp in local languages, with automatic escalation if timelines are breached. Visibility is as important as speed. Fourth, independent audits and public dashboards. Regular third-party audits and anonymised dashboards showing claim ratios, settlement times, and district-level performance create accountability for insurers and implementing agencies alike. When farmers’ lived experience consistently matches system timelines, trust shifts from rhetoric to reality—and participation follows. What innovations can serve as national templates? Himachal Pradesh offers a practical, ground-tested template for how livestock risk protection can be operationalised at scale. The state’s cooperative-led outreach model, anchored in milk unions and village-level institutions, allows insurance and animal health services to piggyback on trusted, everyday touchpoints rather than stand-alone enrolment drives. This significantly lowers awareness gaps and improves uptake. Equally important is Himachal’s dense para-veterinary and extension network, which functions as the first responder for disease reporting, vaccinations, and mortality verification. When para-vets are digitally enabled and institutionally aligned, claims move faster and data quality improves—reducing both farmer frustration and insurer leakage. The state’s ongoing digitalisation of animal health records, breeding, and service delivery creates continuity across the animal lifecycle, enabling risk assessment and policy servicing without repetitive paperwork. This integrated data flow is critical for actuarial credibility and faster settlements. Two financing innovations stand out. Bundling insurance with milk procurement channels sharply reduces customer acquisition costs and premium collection friction, as deductions can be seamlessly aligned with milk payments. Additionally, the use of Milk Cess as a co-funding mechanism for premiums demonstrates how sectoral levies can be recycled to de-risk producers themselves. Together, these elements show how institutional design—not subsidies alone—can make livestock insurance viable, trusted, and scalable. Should India introduce productivity‑linked insurance? India should move toward productivity-linked livestock insurance—but only through a phased, data-anchored evolution, not a leap. Mortality coverage must remain the foundation. It addresses the most catastrophic risk, is easiest to verify, and builds early trust among farmers, insurers, and states. Without a robust mortality layer, more complex covers will lack credibility and fiscal discipline. That said, productivity losses are economically larger and more frequent than deaths. Heat stress–induced milk yield dips, infertility, disease-related work-loss, and prolonged recovery periods quietly erode household incomes, often without triggering any formal support. Ignoring these losses limits the real stabilisation potential of livestock insurance. The constraint is not concept, but measurement. Productivity-linked insurance requires reliable baseline data at the animal or herd level, regular digital milk recording, and credible attribution mechanisms to distinguish normal variability from insurable shocks. Parametric or index-based triggers—such as temperature-humidity indices, disease outbreak thresholds, or verified yield deviation bands—offer a practical pathway, but only once data density improves. India should therefore evolve stepwise: begin with universal mortality cover, pilot productivity-linked add-ons in organised milk sheds and cooperatives, refine triggers and payout logic, and scale gradually. Done right, this progression can transform livestock insurance from a safety net into a true income-stabilisation instrument. What would a unified livestock digital ecosystem look like? By 2030, India’s livestock sector should be anchored in a unified digital ecosystem built around a single, tamper-resistant animal ID linked to a verified farmer ID. This core identity layer would serve as the common reference point across institutions, eliminating today’s silos between animal husbandry, insurance, banking, and markets. On this foundation would sit multiple interoperable layers. The health and disease layer would record vaccinations, treatments, outbreak exposure, and biosecurity status in real time through para-vets and veterinary networks. The insurance and risk layer would track coverage, claims history, and risk scores, enabling faster payouts and actuarially sound pricing. A breeding and productivity layer would capture genetics, fertility, lactation cycles, and yield trends—starting with organised milk sheds and expanding over time. Above this, a financial services layer would allow banks and MFIs to treat insured, traceable livestock as bankable assets—unlocking credit, working capital, and embedded insurance. Finally, an advisory and market access layer would deliver personalised alerts on nutrition, heat stress, disease risk, and price signals, while linking farmers seamlessly to milk procurement, input suppliers, and buyers. For the farmer, this complexity must be invisible. The system should feel like one trusted interface—one that protects assets, stabilises income, rewards good practices, and connects livestock keepers to markets and finance with dignity and predictability. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3577/can-seafood-industry-police-itself-fao-weighs-in.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3577/can-seafood-industry-police-itself-fao-weighs-in.html Fri, 13 Feb 2026 16:39:03 +0530 Esther Garrido of FAO urges processors, retailers and foodservice operators to integrate authenticity testing and supplier verification into core business risk management In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Esther Garrido, Fisheries Officer at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, explains why establishing a reliable global baseline for fish fraud remains elusive due to fragmented data, inconsistent methodologies and systemic underreporting. She highlights that strong economic incentives, coupled with weak enforcement, continue to drive species substitution, mislabelling and other deceptive practices that threaten consumer trust, public health and marine sustainability. Esther underscores that fraud detection must be integrated into routine food safety and fisheries governance systems, supported by harmonised traceability standards and smarter use of analytical technologies. She stresses that meaningful progress will require coordinated international action, stronger regulatory frameworks, private sector accountability and sustained capacity building to protect biodiversity, food security and market integrity. Scope and Scale : Why is it so hard to establish a reliable global baseline for fish fraud, and what would it take to produce one? Despite frequent references to figures, the fisheries and aquaculture sector lacks a reliable global baseline because data are fragmented, methods are inconsistent, and fraud is systematically underreported. Different studies use different definitions of fraud, sampling strategies, and analytical tools, making results difficult to compare across regions or species. Institutionally, establishing a baseline it would require coordinated reporting mechanisms, stronger data sharing between countries, and clear mandates for competent authorities to monitor fraud systematically, not just incidentally. FAO’s report makes clear that without global coordination, estimates will remain indicative rather than definitive. Economic Incentives vs. Enforcement : How important are economic incentives compared to weak enforcement in driving fish fraud? Economic incentives are the primary driver of fish fraud, but weak enforcement determines whether it is worth taking the risk. Large price differentials between species that look similar, between fish production methods (wild vs. farmed), or between origins create strong motivation for species substitution, misbranding, or mislabelling. In regions with limited inspection capacity or weak regulatory frameworks or weak penalties, the economic reward far outweighs the risk. FAO emphasizes that fraud is not simply a market issue; it is a governance issue, where incentives and enforcement failures reinforce each other. Consumer and Public Health Risk: Which forms of fish fraud pose the greatest risks to human health, and are current frameworks sufficient? All forms of fraud can have food safety implications. The risks have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. I can think about high-risk situations when fraud leads to species substitution involving toxic species, undeclared allergens, or the addition of adulterants that can harm consumers, but there might be other circumstances that may imply the same level of risk. While food safety systems are generally designed to detect unintentional food safety issues, they are less well equipped to detect deliberate deception. FAO highlights that food fraud often falls between food safety, quality control, and fisheries management mandates. Without integrating fraud detection into routine controls, health risks linked to intentional misrepresentation can remain invisible. Biodiversity and Sustainability Impact: How does fish fraud undermine fisheries management and sustainability claims? Fish fraud can undermine fisheries management by distorting catch data and masking overfishing. When species or origins are misreported, managers lose the ability to accurately track exploitation levels or enforce conservation measures. This can threaten biodiversity and also food security in the long-term, a key concern for FAO. Technology and Accessibility Gap: How can regulators bridge the gap between advanced detection tools and real-world accessibility? Analytical tools such as DNA barcoding or isotope analysis are useful, but FAO stresses that technology alone is not enough. Bridging the gap requires tiered monitoring systems, where low-cost screening tools are used routinely and analytical methods are reserved for targeted investigations. Traceability and Labelling Standards: What prevents global alignment on seafood traceability and labelling standards? Traceability requirements and labelling standards for food have been developed by the Codex Alimentarius, and they provide clear information and are a benchmark for food safety, but the aquatic sector presents unique challenges due to the complexity of the sector and increasing international trade of fisheries and aquaculture products. Logistically, small-scale fisheries and complex trans-shipment chains pose challenges. FAO’s report highlights that while scientific naming and traceability are widely recognized as essential, global alignment requires political will, regulatory coherence, and support mechanisms to ensure smaller actors are not excluded. Role of the Private Sector: What responsibilities should the private sector assume, and how can proactive compliance be encouraged? Processors of aquatic products, retailers, and foodservice companies play a central role, as they often control the technical specifications of the products they buy and select their suppliers. Businesses should implement due diligence, supplier verification, traceability systems, and routine authenticity testing as part of normal operations. Fraud prevention works best when it is integrated into business risk management, not treated as an external enforcement issue. Path Forward: What combination of actions is most likely to reduce fish fraud over the next decade? No single solution will suffice. The most effective path forward combines robust regulatory frameworks, stronger enforcement, international cooperation and data sharing, risk-based use of analytical technologies, harmonized labelling and traceability requirements also for aquatic products, capacity building in developing regions, and greater consumer awareness and transparency. This is the way forward. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3575/cocoas-130-billion-reckoning.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3575/cocoas-130-billion-reckoning.html Wed, 11 Feb 2026 12:50:42 +0530 Rising regulation, climate stress and labour risk are forcing the global chocolate industry to confront structural weaknesses embedded deep in West Africa’s smallholder supply chains Roughly 70 per cent of the world’s cocoa is produced in Africa, primarily in West Africa, anchoring a global chocolate industry that depends heavily on a single, climate-exposed region. Yet cocoa supply chains face persistent and deeply rooted risks, including child and forced labour, chronic farmer poverty, land degradation, deforestation and escalating climate stress. Production is dominated by smallholder farmers, most cultivating less than five hectares, operating within fragmented systems where informal intermediaries limit visibility and traceability. At the same time, new regulatory frameworks such as the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) are significantly increasing corporate due-diligence obligations, pushing companies to scrutinize sourcing practices at an unprecedented level of detail. For a sector historically built on opacity, the compliance bar is rising fast. What the Data Reveals: Scale Without Stability Data from Sedex, one of the world’s largest ethical trade platforms, illustrates both expanding engagement and persistent vulnerability. Over the past decade, cocoa sites registered on Sedex have increased by 200 per cent, now representing approximately 280,000 workers globally. Since 2020, the number of audits conducted annually across cocoa sites has risen by 174 per cent, reflecting intensifying oversight. Yet the average combined risk score across cocoa sites stands at a medium 5 out of 10—a figure that masks significant structural fragilities. Growth in monitoring has not yet translated into proportional risk reduction. Labour and Water: The Highest-Risk Indicators Globally, working hours and water management emerge as the highest-risk indicators across cocoa operations. These findings point simultaneously to economic strain within labour systems and environmental pressure in producing regions. Africa’s average combined risk score is 20.5 per cent higher than the global average, placing it firmly in the high-risk category. Other regions record an overall medium risk level but still exhibit critical weaknesses at the indicator level. Across both Africa and Asia, the most significant social risks relate to wages, working hours and health and safety. Asia records the highest working-hours risk, scoring 7.8 per cent higher than Africa across cocoa sites, underscoring how labour intensity and enforcement gaps vary regionally. Audit Findings: Compliance Gaps Persist Audit data reinforces the systemic nature of these challenges. Seventy-seven percent of non-compliances identified at cocoa sites relate to wages, working hours and health and safety. More concerning, 58 per cent of critical and business-critical non-compliances are linked specifically to health and safety failures, highlighting weaknesses in protective systems and operational safeguards. Risk exposure is not confined to origin countries. In the past 12 months, China and the United States together accounted for 21.4 per cent of global cocoa non-compliances, split evenly between them, followed by Turkey and Mexico. Compliance vulnerabilities therefore extend across processing and downstream markets. Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana: The Epicentre of Supply and Vulnerability Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana together supply roughly 60 per cent of global cocoa, placing them at the centre of both opportunity and systemic risk. Farmers in both countries commonly earn below the poverty line and face mounting pressures including child labour concerns, swollen shoot disease, illegal mining encroachment and recurring climate shocks such as El Niño-driven droughts. Both countries exhibit high inherent risk in regular employment conditions, wages and health and safety. However, their working-hours risk profiles diverge sharply. Côte d’Ivoire registers extreme high risk, while Ghana’s working-hours risk is 36 per cent lower, placing it in the medium range. These differences suggest that national governance frameworks and enforcement mechanisms can materially influence risk outcomes. Environmental Compliance: Documentation vs. Intent Environmental issues rank as the fourth most common category of non-compliance at cocoa sites. Eleven percent of non-compliances relate to water use and waste management, most frequently due to insufficient wastewater permits. A further 7 per cent concern reforestation, conservation and biodiversity, with the most common issue being a lack of awareness regarding local biodiversity regulations. In many cases, environmental gaps stem less from deliberate environmental harm and more from weak management systems, inadequate documentation and incomplete understanding of regulatory obligations. The compliance challenge is therefore as much administrative as ecological. Faster Self-Assessment, Persistent Blind Spots Self-assessment data suggests growing digital maturity. In 2025, more than 60 per cent of cocoa sites completed their Self-Assessment Questionnaire (SAQ) in under one day, indicating faster risk identification processes. Most sites report having a designated individual responsible for environmental management. However, a disconnect remains. Many sites are unaware of specific environmental requirements set by their buyers, creating compliance gaps despite internal accountability structures. Additionally, 15 per cent of sites report either negative impacts on indigenous or local communities or an inability to confirm impacts due to a lack of formal assessment, pointing to persistent weaknesses in community-level due diligence. Traceability: The Structural Weak Link Traceability remains the sector’s most consequential vulnerability. In 2023, only 22 per cent of indirect cocoa supply was traceable to farm level. With an estimated 5 to 6 million farmers and up to 50 million people globally dependent on cocoa, limited traceability significantly increases exposure to regulatory breaches, reputational risk and climate- or disease-related supply disruptions. As global regulations tighten, fragmented supply chains without farm-level transparency will face increasing commercial and legal pressure. The Strategic Inflection Point The cocoa sector is clearly in transition. Oversight is expanding, audits are increasing and digital tools are accelerating risk detection. Yet the structural pressures of poverty, labour strain, environmental stress and limited traceability remain deeply embedded. For an industry worth an estimated $130 billion annually, the next decade will not be defined solely by yield improvements or price volatility. It will be defined by whether cocoa’s supply chains can evolve into transparent, resilient systems capable of withstanding regulatory scrutiny and climate uncertainty. The future of chocolate may ultimately depend less on flavour innovation—and more on governance. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3574/from-domestic-strength-to-global-influence-brazils-bioinput-playbook.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3574/from-domestic-strength-to-global-influence-brazils-bioinput-playbook.html Wed, 11 Feb 2026 12:12:41 +0530 Mauro Heringer tells Agrospectrum how regulatory coordination, tropical biotech and sovereign innovation are positioning Brazil at the center of regenerative agriculture In an exclusive interview with Agrospectrum, Mauro Heringer, Director of International Relations at ABINBIO and Member of the National Bioinputs Export Committee (ApexBrasil), outlined how Brazil’s dominance in tropical bioinputs is reshaping global agricultural markets. He emphasized that Brazil’s competitive edge lies in its “Proof of Tropical Resilience,” with biological solutions tested across six biomes under extreme climatic and pest pressures—conditions that validate their robustness for global deployment. Heringer highlighted regulatory harmonization, living logistics, and institutional coordination under Law 15,070/2024 as central to accelerating exports while positioning Brazil as a benchmark for sustainable agricultural biotechnology. Framing bioinputs as a matter of national security and technological sovereignty, he asserted that Brazil’s ambition extends beyond exports to leading a global transition toward high-performance regenerative agriculture. From Domestic Success to Export Strategy Brazil has built a large and sophisticated domestic bio-inputs market. What specific capabilities or lessons from domestic adoption give Brazilian companies a competitive edge when entering highly regulated international markets? Brazil’s success in the bioinputs sector is not merely a function of sales volume—it reflects deep biotechnological and institutional maturity that has given rise to a true “tropical innovation ecosystem.” The country’s competitive advantage rests on what can be called the Proof of Tropical Resilience. Unlike competitors operating in temperate climates, Brazilian companies develop bioinputs for an environment defined by six distinct biomes within a single territory, continuous year-round cultivation cycles, intense pest pressure and high temperatures. These are among the most challenging agricultural conditions in the world—and Brazil has learned to innovate within them. This is where the real advantage lies: the tropicalization of biotechnology. Brazil does not simply “sell the bottle.” It exports the expertise required to replace or complement synthetic chemistry in highly productive agricultural systems under extreme biological stress. As a result, Brazilian companies are not commodity suppliers. They are holders of strategic intellectual property essential to advancing sustainable global food security. The lesson is straightforward: if a biological solution performs consistently across Brazilian biomes—particularly in the Cerrado—it possesses more than enough robustness for virtually any other agricultural region in the world. Brazil exports resilience, not just microorganisms. Regulatory Asymmetry Across Markets How does the export committee plan to navigate starkly different regulatory regimes for biological inputs in the EU, the United States, and Latin America, and where do you see the greatest bottlenecks to market access? I will start from the end of the question. In my view, the biggest bottlenecks are regulatory alignment and what I call “Living Logistics.” Exporting chemicals is relatively straightforward. Exporting living organisms—bacteria and fungi—is fundamentally different. It requires cold-chain infrastructure, precision logistics and strict control over viability and shelf-life throughout transit. Maintaining biological stability over long international distances remains the most significant technical and commercial challenge. On the regulatory front, asymmetries between countries create additional complexity. Rules, compliance standards and legal frameworks vary widely, making harmonization a strategic priority. To address this, a formal partnership was established in mid-2025 between ApexBrasil and CropLife Brasil, which recently welcomed ABINBIO (Brazilian Association of Bioinput Industries). Together, they formed the National Bioinputs Export Committee, a platform designed to coordinate international expansion and regulatory strategy. Navigating global markets requires differentiated approaches, as regulatory cultures are not uniform. In the European Union, the framework is guided by the Precautionary Principle, which emphasizes intrinsic hazard. There, our strategy is centered almost entirely on demonstrating toxicological safety, purity and the absence of contaminants. We do not sell “productivity” to Europe—we sell food safety and the elimination of chemical residues. The positioning should resemble an “Intel Inside” for agriculture: if it carries Brazilian bio-technology, it represents sustainability and safety. In the United States, the regulatory philosophy—led by the EPA—is pragmatic and risk-based. The focus must therefore be on agronomic efficacy. Our dossiers emphasize large-scale performance data generated across millions of Brazilian hectares under tropical conditions. This industrial-scale validation offers something that controlled laboratory trials alone cannot replicate. In Latin America, the priority should be regional harmonization. Here, the challenge is largely political and institutional. Alignment within Mercosur is essential, with Brazil’s regulatory approval—already subject to rigorous scrutiny by MAPA, ANVISA and IBAMA, under one of the world’s most advanced bioinput frameworks—serving as a regional quality benchmark. The objective is mutual recognition: if a product has been approved by the tropical leader, Brazil, it should qualify for fast-track registration in neighboring markets such as Paraguay, Colombia and Bolivia. In short, the pathway to global expansion requires regulatory intelligence, logistical innovation and geopolitical coordination—not just technological excellence. Branding “Brazil” in Sustainability-Driven Markets The project emphasizes brand positioning around sustainability and bioeconomy. How do you reconcile Brazil’s leadership in bio-inputs with ongoing international scrutiny of its broader environmental record, particularly in land use and deforestation? This is a fundamental question. First, it is important to adjust the premise of the question with data. Often, the narrative imposed on the sustainability issue is a distorted and uninformed view. Brazil is an agro-environmental powerhouse: we preserve more than 60 per cent of our territory with native vegetation and possess the most rigorous environmental legislation in the world (the Forest Code) and, now, modern Bioinput legislation. No other major food producer delivers these numbers.Our leadership in Bioinputs is not an attempt to "compensate" for a problem, but rather the natural evolution of this preservationist mindset. Thanks to our tropical biotechnology (such as Biological Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium Fixation and no-till farming), we have managed to increase production by 400 per cent in recent decades while expanding the land area by only 40 per cent.Therefore, Brazil needs to be emulated. By exporting bioinputs, we are offering the world the same technology that allows us to be the only country feeding 1 billion people while preserving the majority of its forests. Innovation vs. Standardization Tension Biological inputs often require localized formulations and application protocols. How does Brazil balance the need for market-specific adaptation with the efficiencies required for scalable global exports? We solve this dilemma through a "Platform Biology" strategy. The common mistake is thinking that one exports a "ready-to-use final product" just like a chemical pesticide. Brazil has learned to export the Base Technology and Application Know-How.In Industry Standardization (Upstream): Brazil has achieved global excellence in industrial development. Our factories produce spores and metabolites with very high concentration and purity and extended shelf-life. This is standardizable and scalable worldwide. It is the biological "hardware."In Field Adaptation (Downstream): The "software" (how to use it) is adaptable. Our companies don’t just sell the jug; they sell the agronomic protocol. We have formulation technology that allows the same tested robust strain to be activated or applied differently depending on Indian or American soil. Thus, efficiency comes from the industrial scale of our fermentation; adaptation comes from the robustness of our tropical strains. If a bacterium survives the stress of Brazilian soil, it performs easily in less hostile environments.Brazil does not export a "medicine," but rather a "treatment system." By separating the biological asset (standardized) from the application intelligence (localized), companies achieve the benefits of mass production without the risk of inefficacy in foreign soils. Domestic Ownership as Strategic Advantage With over 80 per cent of bio-input companies being Brazilian-owned, how does domestic ownership shape innovation, capital formation, and long-term export competitiveness compared to multinational-dominated ag-input sectors? The fact that Brazil’s bioinput sector is predominantly national in capital structure—historically over 80 per cent —is a positive anomaly within Brazilian agribusiness, which has traditionally been dependent on multinational chemical and seed companies. This domestic foundation has fostered a form of biotechnological sovereignty that significantly reshapes Brazil’s export competitiveness. However, intellectual honesty requires a distinction between the sector’s historical structure and its current market dynamics. The premise that the sector remains mostly national is still statistically defensible when measured by number of companies. Brazil has hundreds of registered bioinput firms—many of them small and medium-sized regional agritechs. If one counts by tax ID (CNPJ), the majority are indeed Brazilian-owned. But when the metric shifts from number of companies to revenue concentration and market share, the picture is evolving rapidly. Multinational giants such as Bayer, Syngenta, Corteva and UPL—as well as foreign investment groups—have accelerated acquisitions of leading Brazilian bioinput firms. Once a Brazilian company is acquired, it continues operating locally, but capital allocation decisions and long-term strategic direction shift to a global headquarters. Why is this happening? Because the Brazilian bioinput sector has become one of the most profitable and dynamic segments in agribusiness, turning it into a primary target for mergers and acquisitions. Many companies that began with 100 per cent national capital were acquired precisely because multinationals struggled to replicate the speed of Brazilian innovation or navigate Brazil’s complex regulatory and agronomic landscape as effectively as local players. This creates a strategic paradox. Brazil risks becoming an exceptional “nursery of biological startups”—a global laboratory for innovation—whose most successful companies are absorbed by foreign capital once they achieve maturity and export scale. At the same time, the very factors that attract multinational interest explain Brazil’s competitive edge. In global chemical conglomerates, biological products are often treated as complementary or defensive tools—designed to protect or extend the lifecycle of synthetic molecules. In contrast, for national Brazilian companies, bioinputs are not an add-on; they are the core business. That structural difference matters. When biology is the central strategy, 100 per cent of R&D investment is directed toward biological performance. There is no internal conflict of interest, such as the risk of cannibalizing sales of high-margin synthetic fungicides. In large chemical corporations, a disruptive biological innovation can threaten existing revenue streams. In Brazilian bioinput companies, disruption is the objective. The result is faster innovation cycles, greater technological boldness and a development pipeline focused purely on biological efficiency under tropical conditions. This strategic clarity—biology as mission, not supplement—is what transformed Brazil into a global reference in bioinputs. The challenge now is ensuring that this innovative sovereignty is not diluted as consolidation accelerates. Competition with Established Multinationals As global agrochemical and biotech firms rapidly expand their biological portfolios, where does Brazil see its most defensible competitive moat—cost, performance in tropical systems, speed of innovation, or something else? Our defensive moat is, without a doubt, Proven Performance in Tropical Systems. While multinationals compete by buying startups to build a portfolio, Brazil has an advantage that cannot be bought: decades of natural selection in the field.The 'Tropicalization' Factor: Biology is context-dependent. A fungus developed in a laboratory in Europe might die in two hours under the sun in Mato Grosso (or Maharashtra). Our strains were isolated and selected under extreme thermal and water stress. They are "elite athletes" of survival.Real Scale vs. Greenhouse: Multinationals test in controlled greenhouses. Brazil tests on 40 million hectares of commercial crops. We have the world’s largest database on how bioinputs interact with the real environment.Cost-Benefit: Since we master large-scale fermentation (on-farm and industrial), we can deliver this elite biology at a cost that makes its use viable in commodities (soybeans, corn, cotton, sugarcane, etc.), not just in expensive fruits.Application Science and Coexistence (Compatibility): Foreign multinationals usually sell the "bottle." Brazilian companies sell the management. Brazil has learned to mix biologicals with chemicals in the same spray tank without inactivating the microorganism. This knowledge regarding formulation stability and chemical compatibility is what global producers want most today to reduce costs.The Brazilian "Pipeline": Brazil possesses the greatest microbial biodiversity in the world. The ability to isolate, test, and register new assets with agility creates an innovation cycle that multinationals, with their global bureaucratic structures, struggle to match. Institutional Coordination and Governance What concrete mechanisms will ensure that the export committee translates coordination into measurable outcomes—such as export growth or regulatory approvals—rather than remaining a symbolic platform? The Committee began its work at the end of 2025. To ensure the export committee does not become a "symbolic platform" without practical delivery, the governance of the bioinput sector in Brazil is being structured on technical execution mechanisms and commercial diplomacy.Law No. 15,070/2024 provides the legal basis, but the translation into measurable results depends on three pillars of institutional coordination. The committee does not act only in commercial promotion, but in the convergence of standards. The concrete mechanism is the creation of joint working groups with bodies such as EFSA (Europe) and the EPA (USA), aiming to reduce registration time abroad through the acceptance of data generated in Brazil (mutual recognition).The committee utilizes the rigor of the new legal framework to advocate that biological efficacy dossiers approved by MAPA (Ministry of Agriculture) be accepted as technical proof in other countries, eliminating the need to repeat field tests that last years.Institutional coordination involves ApexBrasil, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Supply in a market segmentation program. Examples such as the creation of an export "Bio-Pipeline" can be cited. The committee identifies biotechnological bottlenecks in partner countries and can directly connect Brazilian companies that have the specific solution through diplomatic missions, trade fairs, events, and through agricultural attachés at Brazilian embassies in key countries.Another aspect to prevent Brazilian products from being blocked by subjective sustainability issues is the implementation of Certification and Traceability Support within a Bioinput Conformity Seal system. Audits will ensure that the exported input meets bioeconomy and low carbon emission requirements, integrating them into the national bioinput program. Long-Term Market Transformation Do you view Brazil’s push into biological inputs primarily as an export opportunity, or as part of a broader effort to reshape global crop protection and fertility markets away from synthetic inputs—and how does that ambition influence policy and investment priorities? This is the question that defines the "endgame" for Brazil. The strategic answer is that export is merely the vehicle, but the global paradigm shift is the destination. Brazil doesn’t just want to be the largest exporter of bioinputs; it intends to be the architect of the new era of world agriculture.This is, undoubtedly, a global paradigm shift. Export is just the economic consequence; the cause is the survival necessity of modern agriculture. Brazil doesn’t just want to sell a substitute for chemicals; we want to lead the transition to the Era of High-Performance Regenerative Agriculture.We are positioning ourselves to be the "Saudi Arabia of Green Chemistry." Just as the Middle East was indispensable in the oil era, Brazil will be indispensable in the bioeconomy era. We are not just "moving away" from synthetics; we are integrating biological tools to create a smarter and more resilient system.This vision changes everything. Our investment priorities have shifted from the logic of "technology importation" to "technological sovereignty." The National Bioinput Plan and the APEX Brasil Bioinput Export Committee Project are proof that the Brazilian State has decided that biotechnology is strategic for national and global security.The Brazilian offensive aims to reposition synthetic inputs (especially fossil-based nitrogen fertilizers and high-toxicity pesticides) as high-risk assets with high environmental costs. The vulnerability revealed by global crises (such as the fertilizer shortage in 2022) accelerated the National Fertilizer Plan and the Bioinput Legal Framework (Law 15,070/2024). Brazil treats bioinputs as a matter of national security. The ambition is to reduce external dependence on mineral fertilizers by up to 50 per cent in the coming decades.By proving this is possible on a continental scale, Brazil creates a "demonstration effect" for the rest of the world, leading a movement for biotechnological food sovereignty. We are redesigning the architecture of food production. The future is biological, and Brazil is the laboratory where this future has already begun.I invite India to join us on this journey. Together, as leaders of the Global South, we have the responsibility and the capacity to define how the world will feed itself over the next 50 years: with more biology, more biotechnology, and more respect for our tropical soils and the people who are here and their future generations. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3573/gross-wen-technologies-martin-gross-on-algae-based-wastewater-as-next-frontier-of-resilient-infrastructure.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3573/gross-wen-technologies-martin-gross-on-algae-based-wastewater-as-next-frontier-of-resilient-infrastructure.html Tue, 10 Feb 2026 11:48:51 +0530 In an exclusive with AgroSpectrum, the Founder & CEO explains how Global Cleantech 100 recognition validates economic durability, circular value creation, and the future of wastewater as a strategic asset AgroSpectrum spoke with Martin Gross, Founder & CEO of Gross-Wen Technologies, following the company’s inclusion in the 2026 Global Cleantech 100. He highlighted how the recognition validates algae-based wastewater treatment as a mature, infrastructure-ready solution for both municipal and industrial users, delivering regulatory compliance alongside energy savings and usable biomass. Gross emphasized Gross-Wen’s focus on economic durability—reducing operating costs, emissions, and chemical dependence while enabling circular value creation through nutrient and carbon recovery. Looking ahead, he positioned wastewater as a strategic asset, with Gross-Wen helping cities and industries build resilient, low-carbon water infrastructure amid tightening capital and climate constraints. Recognition & Strategic Validation Gross-Wen Technologies has been named to the 2026 Global Cleantech 100 at a time when the market is becoming more disciplined and competitive. What does this recognition signal to you about the maturity of algae-based wastewater treatment and its role in the future of critical infrastructure? Being named to the 2026 Global Cleantech 100 signals that algae-based wastewater treatment has reached infrastructure maturity across both municipal and industrial applications. For cities and food and beverage manufacturers alike, it validates that biological systems can deliver reliable compliance while producing a usable algae biomass. This recognition underscores algae’s growing role in resilient, next-generation water infrastructure. Economic Durability as the New Cleantech Mandate Cleantech Group highlights a shift from efficiency-driven innovation to durability-driven systems. How does Gross-Wen’s technology embody economic durability, particularly for municipalities and industrial customers operating under tighter capital and regulatory constraints? Gross-Wen’s technology delivers economic durability by reducing energy use, lowering greenhouse gas emissions, and minimizing chemical and sludge costs for municipalities and industrial operators, including food and beverage facilities. The treatment process also produces algae biomass as a viable byproduct, creating opportunities to offset operating costs. This combination supports long-term affordability under increasing regulatory and capital constraints. Water, Climate, and National Resilience Water security is increasingly intersecting with climate resilience and national security. How do you see algae-based wastewater treatment contributing to long-term water independence and resource security in the U.S. and globally? Algae-based wastewater treatment reduces reliance on energy-intensive processes while enabling nutrient recovery and water reuse at both municipal plants and industrial facilities. For food and beverage producers, this supports compliance and operational resilience while lowering emissions. At a broader level, it strengthens water independence and resource security in the face of climate volatility. Scalability in a Competitive Market With investment and attention concentrating in select “grow” sectors like AI and critical minerals, how has Gross-Wen positioned itself to scale in a market where capital efficiency, predictability, and proven deployment matter more than ever? We’ve positioned Gross-Wen to scale by focusing on standardized, capital-efficient systems with predictable performance for both municipal utilities and industrial customers. In sectors like food and beverage, proven energy savings, emissions reductions, and consistent biomass production are more important than speculative innovation. Repeat deployments and operating data have been central to our growth. Carbon, Nutrients, and Circular Value Creation Gross-Wen’s system not only treats wastewater but captures carbon and recovers nutrients for reuse. How important is this circular value proposition in helping customers justify adoption—and how do you see markets evolving for recovered nutrients and algae-derived products? The circular value proposition is critical because nutrients and carbon are captured into algae biomass during treatment, reducing greenhouse gas emissions while producing a usable product. This helps both municipalities and industrial users justify investment beyond compliance alone. We see growing demand for recovered nutrients and algae-derived products as sustainability and cost pressures continue to align. From Pilot Projects to Infrastructure Mainstay Many climate technologies struggle to move from pilots to widespread infrastructure adoption. What have been the key lessons Gross-Wen has learned in bridging that gap, and what policy or procurement changes would most accelerate deployment? The key lesson has been designing systems that integrate seamlessly into existing municipal plants and food and beverage operations. Demonstrating consistent performance alongside energy, emissions, and biomass benefits in real-world facilities builds trust. Procurement policies that prioritize lifecycle value over lowest upfront cost would significantly accelerate deployment. Innovation Philosophy in a Pressure-Cooker Environment The cleantech ecosystem is described as a “pressure cooking” environment, with fewer technologies breaking out. How do you maintain innovation velocity while ensuring reliability and predictability for customers who depend on mission-critical water systems? We maintain innovation velocity by tightly linking biological advances to operational reliability for both municipal and industrial users. Every improvement must reduce energy use, lower emissions, or improve biomass outcomes without increasing complexity. That discipline ensures innovation strengthens, rather than destabilizes, mission-critical systems. Looking Ahead: The Next Five Years As AI-driven demand, climate volatility, and resource constraints intensify, what role do you envision Gross-Wen Technologies playing in reshaping how cities and industries think about wastewater—not as a liability, but as a strategic asset? Over the next five years, we see municipalities and food and beverage companies increasingly treating wastewater as a strategic resource. Gross-Wen will help transform treatment systems into platforms that deliver clean water, reduced emissions, and valuable biomass—reshaping wastewater infrastructure for long-term resilience and value creation. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3572/irrigation-is-no-longer-about-yield-alone-frank-yan-country-manager-china-komet-irrigation.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3572/irrigation-is-no-longer-about-yield-alone-frank-yan-country-manager-china-komet-irrigation.html Mon, 09 Feb 2026 10:43:48 +0530 Komet positions its low-pressure sprinklers to support water-saving KPIs, data verification, and climate-resilient farming In an exclusive Agrospectrum interview, Frank Yan, Country Manager China at Komet Irrigation, says Asia—particularly China and India—is central to Komet’s 2026 growth strategy because it sits at the intersection of acute water stress, food security pressure, and large-scale irrigation potential. China remains the most urgent market commercially and environmentally, where government-led water-saving policies, performance-based subsidies, and a mature pivot OEM ecosystem create strong demand for Komet’s low-pressure, high-uniformity sprinklers, while India is viewed as a longer-term scale test case constrained by infrastructure, farm size, and farmer financing. Yan emphasizes that the biggest gap today is not technology but market proof—calling for field demonstrations and data-driven evidence to clearly show farmers how efficient irrigation stabilizes yields, reduces energy costs, and manages climate risk. By 2026, Komet’s success in Asia will be defined less by short-term sales and more by brand leadership—measured by widespread OEM adoption, farmer trust, and its systems becoming the default choice for water-efficient mechanized irrigation. Asia’s Water Stress Moment Asia is entering a critical decade for water security, with agriculture at the center of the challenge. How does Komet view Asia’s role in its global growth strategy for 2026, and which markets are most urgent—both commercially and from a water-stress perspective? Asia has more than half the world’s population but less freshwater per capita than almost any other continent. Water stress is driven by population growth, urbanization, climate change, and poor governance — not just natural scarcity. China's water problem is worse than most of the other Asian countries simply because of the high population pressure and extremely uneven distribution of the water recourses in the country. India is another country that has a huge pressure from the point of view of water crisis and the need for agricultural production. Komet's products are almost exclusively serving the pivot irrigation market, which requires many conditions be sufficient to support the market growth. Pivot irrigation can only be used when the farm size is big enough; the right infrastructure exists (water source, power supply) and enough money for the initial investment. China has all of these essential elements for pivot irrigation except for the farm size which is relatively small for pivot irrigation. However, the Chinese government spent billions of dollars during the 2010's in promoting the pivot irrigation in the northern part of the country resulting in over 100 thousand pivots installed in less than a decade. There were over 100 pivot companies in China during the peak time of Water Saving irrigation Campaign from 2012-2018. The focus has shifted to drip irrigation in recent years because they found out that drip irrigation saves even more water. The number of pivot manufacturers has dropped from over 100 to merely 11 today. With the fast development of the supply chain in almost all the industrial sectors in China, the pivot manufacturing has been greatly improved, the quality and functionality of the pivot products are at par with the western companies like Valmont and Lindsay. Their focus has been selling into the international markets in the last ten years due to their large production capacity and the decreasing demand in the domestic market . India as a Scale Test Case India represents one of the world’s largest irrigation markets, yet adoption remains uneven across regions and farm sizes. What structural barriers—economic, behavioral, or policy-related—does Komet see as the biggest constraints to scaling efficient irrigation in India? India has a great potential from the population and food security points of view, but the pivot market won't have substantial growth until the basic infrastructure such as water and power supply has been developed in the major agricultural area. The other limiting factor in Indian is the farm size. Pivot irrigation is more efficient when the size of the field reaches over 30 hectares while 86 per cent of the farms in India are smaller than 2 Ha. Hose reel market in India has a great potential for growth because it covers smaller field and its relatively easier to setup and initial investment is low. Komet's big gun products should fit the hose reel market in India well. However, the biggest constraint in this market is the investment. It has to come from the government at the beginning since the farmers have no money to invest. China's experiences shows that only government can start the irrigation market development in developing countries.  From Subsidies to Sustainability Public subsidies have historically shaped irrigation adoption across Asia. How is Komet positioning its solutions in a policy environment that is gradually shifting from input subsidies toward water-use efficiency, climate resilience, and outcomes-based agriculture? Since the early 2010s, China’s central and provincial governments have included sprinkler irrigation machines (including center pivots and hose reels) in the national agricultural machinery purchase subsidy program. By 2023–2025, subsidies covered 30–50 per cent of equipment costs, with some regions offering additional local top-ups. In key grain-producing provinces like Hebei, Henan, Shandong, and Inner Mongolia, thousands of pivots and hose-reel units were deployed under subsidized programs. Infrastructure Integration Investments went beyond equipment to include water source development (wells, reservoirs), pressurized pipe networks, and smart control systems, enabling efficient operation of mechanized irrigation. Since 2011, China has prioritized “high-standard farmland” construction, targeting 1 billion mu (~67 million hectares) by 2030. This includes installing modern irrigation systems like center pivots and hose reels, especially in arid regions (e.g., Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Heilongjiang). China launched the “Red Line” water policy, capping national water use at 670 billion m³/year by 2030. Provinces must meet water-use efficiency KPIs, driving adoption of precision irrigation. Starting around 2020–2022, China began transitioning from pure input-based subsidies (e.g., “buy a machine, get cash”) toward performance- or output-based incentives: Linking subsidies to water savings, crop yield improvements, or fertilizer reduction (part of the national “fertilizer and pesticide zero-growth” and “water-saving agriculture” strategies). Promoting water rights trading pilots and quota-based allocation in arid regions (e.g., Northwest China). Since 2019, provinces like Gansu and Ningxia have piloted “water-saving performance payments”, where farmers receive bonuses based on verified water savings or yield per unit of water, not just equipment ownership. National projects integrate IoT sensors, remote control, and water metering with pivot/hose-reel systems to enable data-driven water allocation and subsidy verification. As an upstream supplier of high-efficiency sprinklers products for pivots and hose reels, Komet can contribute to China’s policy evolution in the following ways: Enable Precision Water Application: Komet’s low-pressure, uniform distribution sprinklers reduce evaporation and runoff, directly improving crop per drop metrics required under China’s water caps. Support Verification of Water Savings: By integrating Komet sprinklers with flow meters and telemetry (common in Chinese smart irrigation projects), actual water use can be monitored—enabling performance-based subsidies rather than mere equipment purchase rewards. Align with China’s “Green Agriculture” Standards: Komet’s CE-certified, energy-efficient designs help Chinese integrators qualify for green procurement lists and provincial eco-subsidies tied to ISO 14046 (water footprint). Smallholders vs. Commercial Farms Asia’s irrigation demand spans smallholder farmers, plantation crops, and large commercial operations. In 2026, how is Komet balancing product design and go-to-market strategies across these vastly different customer segments without diluting impact or margins?  Komet's product lines are limited and so are the focus of the company's efforts in marketing and sales. Small holders in any market are unlikely to be using pivot irrigation therefore not in client group for Komet. Big guns and sprinklers are the main focus of Komet's business; the focus of the company should be on marketing its unique design around low pressure/energy requirement and its superior uniformity of its products. Technology vs. Adoption Gap Efficient irrigation technology is increasingly available, yet on-ground adoption lags potential. From Komet’s experience, is the bigger gap today technological capability, affordability, farmer trust, or last-mile execution—and how is your Asia strategy addressing that gap? The technology is available and Komet's advantage has been proven, however, that advantage has not been shown clearly to the customers. I believe that demonstration of Komet's product advantage needs to be conducted in the market. Climate Variability and System Design With rainfall patterns becoming more erratic, irrigation is no longer just about yield but risk management. How is climate volatility reshaping demand for Komet’s solutions in Asia, and what changes are you making to system design, data use, or service models in response? Irrigation in its core should be about ensuring agricultural production rather than simply water-saving. However, that message has not been clearly and completely crossed to the farmers. Helping farmers understand the core value of efficient irrigation and the key role of best designed sprinkler systems is the key. We need to let the data and fact tell the true story Localization and Partnerships Water management is deeply local—driven by soil, crops, aquifers, and regulation. How important are local partnerships, manufacturing, and service networks to Komet’s Asia and India expansion, and where do you draw the line between global standardization and local customization? With today's manufacturing capability and the nature of the Komet's products (smaller size and bigger value), localization of manufacturing is not necessary. Marketing and selling Komets products, however, requires well developed dealer network and mutually beneficial partnerships with our OEMS and distributors. For China, the existing pivot OEMs are working very aggressively in developing international markets especially in areas that irrigation market is fast developing. We need to work very closely with them in building Komet's product and technology into their overall value system. The fact that most of the developing markets are underdeveloped in terms of water and power supply demands superior products like KPT sprinklers where low pressure/energy is needed to operate. We should focus on marketing this distinguished technological advantage; the lower energy means more profits for the farmers.  Defining Success Beyond Sales By the end of 2026, what would success look like for Komet in Asia and India—not just in terms of revenue or hectares irrigated, but in measurable outcomes such as water savings, farmer income stability, or climate resilience? The best success for Komet would be an improved brand image. It would be a great success in the China market if 8 out of 10 pivot customers use Komet products and all OEMs use more Komet products than last year!  --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3566/fao-on-balancing-climate-urgency-and-food-safety-in-emerging-agrifood-technologies.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3566/fao-on-balancing-climate-urgency-and-food-safety-in-emerging-agrifood-technologies.html Thu, 05 Feb 2026 11:17:22 +0530 FAO outlines a pragmatic, trust-first pathway for deploying environmental inhibitors at scale In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Vittorio Fattori, Food Safety Officer at the FAO, explains how governments can urgently deploy environmental inhibitors to reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions while upholding rigorous food safety standards. He emphasizes a stepwise, proportionate risk assessment approach, allowing rapid scale-up when residues are not detectable, and targeted human risk assessment when they are plausible—ensuring climate action does not undermine consumer trust. Fattori highlights the importance of harmonized Codex standards to reduce regulatory fragmentation, prevent trade disruptions, and provide predictability for innovators and producers globally. Addressing equity, he underscores FAO’s focus on feasible pathways for low- and middle-income countries, including reliance on international scientific evaluations and proportionate controls aligned with national capacities. Framing environmental inhibitors as part of a broader mitigation toolbox—sometimes transitional, sometimes structural—he stresses that transparent communication and continuous reassessment are essential to sustaining public confidence while advancing lower-emission agrifood systems. Balancing Climate Urgency and Food Safety Rigor Given the urgency to reduce agricultural methane and nitrous oxide emissions, how does FAO recommend balancing accelerated deployment of environmental inhibitors with the inherently cautious timelines of food safety risk assessment, without undermining public trust? While recognizing the urgency to cut methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agrifood systems, we also emphasize that ensuring food safety is essential when introducing new practices and technologies. The urgency to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions together with the need to maintain food safety, are some the multiple factors (including also for example animal health and welfare, environmental benefits and more) that decision makers will need to balance in their decision-making process. We believe that by considering food safety at the outset, we can ensure that efforts to reduce environmental impacts are effective, trusted, and well understood. In the case of environmental inhibitors, if no residues are detectable in foods with sensitive methods under proposed use conditions, risk concerns are minimal and scale‑up can proceed with routine verification. If residues are plausible, a proportionate human risk assessment (hazard + exposure) should be completed before widespread use. This staged approach allows mitigation benefits to begin promptly while ensuring consumer protection remains at the core of any proposed intervention. Evidence Thresholds and Precaution What level and type of residue evidence does FAO consider sufficient to move from experimental or pilot use of environmental inhibitors to widespread commercial adoption, especially in contexts where long-term dietary exposure data may be limited? The minimum evidence threshold is to determine whether residues of the parent compound and/or relevant metabolites are present in foods of animal or plant origin under realistic use (i.e. following good agricultural/animal husbandry practice). When robust residue studies show no detectable residues, further studies may be unnecessary. If residues are found, it will be important to follow these steps: Hazard characterization (toxicology of parent + metabolites, using established FAO/WHO principles) to derive health-based guidance values where needed Dietary Exposure assessment Risk characterization that can support risk management measures such as Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) When data are limited and there is scientific uncertainty, it could be considered to conduct  human exposure assessment(s) according to the Codex Alimentarius “Guidelines for rapid risk analysis following instances of detection of contaminants in food where there is no regulatory level”, possibly followed by a full risk assessment specific to human health if the residues in question meet the exclusion criteria of the guidelines. In this regard it is important to recognize that substances already regulated as pesticides or veterinary drugs typically follow their full premarket pathways. Regulatory Fragmentation and Global Trade With environmental inhibitors classified differently across jurisdictions—as veterinary drugs, feed additives, or soil amendments—how does FAO see harmonized Codex standards reducing the risk of trade disruptions and regulatory arbitrage? Today, environmental inhibitors (EIs) can be classified according to national regulations as either as veterinary drugs, feed additives, fertilizer components, or pesticides, which can lead to different data packages and approval routes across markets; this can create a risk of trade friction when residues are handled inconsistently. FAO supports harmonization via Codex. In this context, FAO/WHO expert bodies - e.g. the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) - provide independent scientific advice to underpin Codex standards, including Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) where appropriate. Converging on common data requirements, residue definitions, and risk assessment principles reduces regulatory arbitrage, improves predictability for innovators and producers, and protects consumers while facilitating trade. Cumulative and Systemic Risk Assessment How does FAO propose assessing cumulative food safety risks when environmental inhibitors are used alongside other inputs such as pesticides, veterinary drugs, and feed additives, particularly in intensive production systems? It is important to begin with the foundational EIs assessment (residues → hazard→ exposure) and, where residues are expected, considering aggregate dietary exposure from food and water consistent with existing pesticide/veterinary drug paradigms. When an EI shares toxicological endpoints with other regulated inputs (e.g., similar modes of action or common target organs), assessors would consider cumulative risk assessment considerations aligned with established Codex/Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)/Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) practices. Practically, this means define the residue of concern (parent/metabolites), ensure analytical methods across relevant matrices, and evaluate whether use patterns in intensive systems plausibly raise combined exposure near health-based guidance values. Equity and Adoption in Low- and Middle-Income Countries What considerations is FAO giving to the food safety assessment and regulatory capacity challenges faced by low- and middle-income countries, where monitoring EI residues in food may be technically or financially constrained? We are attentive to capacity constraints in  Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) — notably the cost and technical demands of residue methods, surveillance, and regulatory review. Our guidance therefore stresses stepwise, feasible pathways: begin with plausibility screening of residue transfer, leverage validated methods and internationally available scientific opinions (e.g. from the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)/Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) practices), and apply proportionate controls (label conditions, use restrictions) that match national laboratory capacities. Through the Food Safety work, FAO provides tools, training, and normative guidance that Member countries can adapt, helping them adopt mitigation technologies without compromising consumer protection or market access. Managing Uncertainty in Novel Agrifood Technologies In cases where scientific uncertainty remains—especially regarding chronic exposure or indirect food chain transfer—how does FAO advise policymakers to apply the precautionary principle without stalling climate mitigation innovations? When uncertainty remains — especially about chronic exposure or indirect transfer along the food chain — it can be important to use conservative exposure assumptions and interim risk management measures (e.g., restricted use conditions, defined withdrawal intervals, targeted monitoring) while additional data are generated. As mentioned, existing guidelines like Codex Guidelines for rapid risk analysis following instances of detection of contaminants in food where there is no regulatory level (CXG 92-2019), can prove to be useful in specific circumstances without substituting for full premarket evaluation required for pesticides or veterinary drugs. This approach protects consumers without stalling climate mitigation innovation when that shows clear efficacy and a low likelihood of significant human dietary exposure. Public Perception and Consumer Confidence How important is transparent communication about food safety risk assessments for environmental inhibitors in maintaining consumer confidence, and what role should FAO play in shaping that global narrative? Transparent communication is essential. With this work we wanted to bring some clarity on what environmental inhibitors are, why they are used, and how food safety is assessed. We also wanted to explain in accessible terms what residue testing shows and how standards are set internationally. Our new report and technical brief were designed to explain the science and outline a clear, stepwise safety pathway. In this respect, we support our members by generate and sharing timely, actionable insights on food safety, as well as by providing proactive and strategic guidance on emerging food safety issues. Long-Term Agrifood System Transformation Do you see environmental inhibitors as a transitional solution toward lower-emission agrifood systems, or as a long-term structural component—and how does that distinction influence FAO’s approach to food safety foresight and regulatory guidance? Environmental inhibitors are some of the tools available within a portfolio of measures to lower agrifood systems’ emissions. In some production contexts, EIs may be transitional — bridging to system redesigns (e.g., breeding, feed system changes, nitrogen management). In others, certain inhibitors could become more structural components, provided they consistently demonstrate safety, efficacy, and practicality. This framing shapes the notion of establishing durable, harmonized safety frameworks (including, where needed, Codex MRLs), maintaining surveillance and periodic reassessment as science evolves, and considering the integration of EIs into broader mitigation strategies rather than viewing them in isolation. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3565/geopolitics-over-geology-limits-of-venezuelan-oil-in-volatile-market.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3565/geopolitics-over-geology-limits-of-venezuelan-oil-in-volatile-market.html Tue, 03 Feb 2026 17:52:29 +0530 Venezuela’s vast reserves offer theoretical relief to global supply concerns, but sanctions, infrastructure decay, and uncertainty mean markets continue to price risk—not barrels Global oil markets are increasingly defined by a contradiction. Forecasts from major agencies and analysts suggest that the world is not running out of oil; on the contrary, supply capacity appears sufficient to meet demand well into the future. Yet prices remain volatile, reacting sharply to geopolitical tensions, sanctions announcements, and political signals. This disconnect reflects a deeper transformation in how oil markets operate: geology matters less than governance, and confidence matters more than capacity. Venezuela epitomizes this paradox. The country holds the largest proven oil reserves in the world, yet its production remains severely constrained. While Venezuelan oil is often invoked as a potential solution to tight markets or rising prices, its real influence on global supply and pricing stability is far more limited—and far more conditional—than such narratives imply. This article examines the global oil supply outlook amid geopolitical risk, focusing on Venezuela’s uncertain production trajectory, the role of sanctions and investment constraints, implications for the United States and India, spillover effects on the agricultural sector, and the longer-term structural forces reshaping energy markets. Plenty of Oil, Persistent Volatility On paper, the global oil system appears well supplied. U.S. shale production remains near record levels, OPEC+ retains spare capacity, and demand growth in advanced economies has slowed as efficiency gains and electrification take hold. Medium-term outlooks generally point to a structural surplus rather than scarcity. Yet oil prices remain highly sensitive to geopolitical developments. The reason is that markets increasingly price reliability, not just volume. Sanctions, political instability, underinvestment, and infrastructure decay have become central variables shaping expectations about which barrels can actually reach the market—and under what conditions. Venezuela sits squarely at this intersection of abundance and uncertainty. Why Prices Stay Reactive Despite Oversupply Even when supply forecasts point to a structural surplus, oil prices remain sensitive and often volatile. This paradox reflects the interaction of three powerful market forces—each shaping expectations and risk pricing in ways that go beyond simple barrel counts. First: Spare capacity is uneven and politically sensitive - Although headline supply figures may show a surplus, the location and accessibility of that spare capacity matter. Much of the available buffer resides in regions with political risk, unstable governance, or constrained export channels. For example, major producers in the Middle East, Africa, and parts of Latin America face ongoing geopolitical tensions that can suddenly affect output or logistics. Even when inventories are adequate overall, perceived vulnerabilities along key pipelines and shipping routes (such as the Strait of Hormuz) can prompt traders to price in risk premiums that support price levels higher than what fundamentals alone would dictate. Second: Upstream investment is constrained and risk-averse- Years of price volatility and uncertainty about the long-term demand trajectory have caused energy companies to tighten capital budgets and focus on short-cycle assets. Many major oil firms have shifted capital toward dividends, share buybacks, or low-cost production hubs rather than large, long-lead projects. This means that while current output may be robust, the pipeline of new capacity that can respond quickly to supply shocks is thin. Financial markets now integrate this investment risk into price expectations; the margin for error is smaller, making prices more sensitive to news about supply disruptions or policy shifts. Third: Sanctions and regulatory risk are structural, not temporary - Sanctions and regulatory constraints—once viewed as episodic disruptions—are now core parts of the oil market’s structure. Countries like Russia, Iran, and Venezuela face long-term export limitations or legal uncertainties that shape how traders, refiners, and investors assess future supply. Sanctions can dislocate supply flows even when physical barrels exist, creating ambiguity about which volumes are reliably accessible. This structural uncertainty embeds risk premiums into pricing that can keep prices elevated or volatile despite a broad supply surplus. When these three forces interact—geopolitical sensitivity, constrained investment responsiveness, and structural policy risk—they produce a market where prices reflect not just how much oil exists, but how confidently markets believe it will be delivered in the future. Even modest geopolitical developments can therefore trigger outsized reactions in prices because they alter expectations about one or more of these underlying determinants. Venezuela: Technical Potential, Fragile Reality Venezuela’s production collapse is not a geological story—it is an institutional one. Years of mismanagement, sanctions, workforce attrition, and infrastructure neglect have reduced output to a fraction of historical levels. Refineries, pipelines, and upgraders require extensive rehabilitation, while extra-heavy crude production depends on diluents and specialized processing capacity. Even when sanctions are partially eased or licenses granted, uncertainty over policy durability continues to deter long-term investment. As Gilbert Michaud, PhD, Assistant Professor of Environmental Policy at Loyola University Chicago, explains: “Global oil markets are highly sensitive to geopolitical issues such as conflicts and sanctions. Venezuela has the technical potential to increase oil output, but large-scale increases that bring down prices or increase investor confidence are unlikely. Uncertainty around access to capital, policy, safety, and related issues will reinforce price instability, especially if global disruptions arise elsewhere. On paper, the Venezuela case offers hope of oil supply, but it likely will not translate into price stability with investment hesitation and policy uncertainty.” This gap between technical potential and operational reality defines Venezuela’s role in today’s oil market. The United States: Structural Fit, Not Volume Impact Since December 2018, U.S. imports of Venezuelan oil have remained below roughly 500,000 barrels per day, compared with total U.S. crude imports of approximately 8.5 million barrels per day. The constraint has not been resource availability, but political risk and regulatory uncertainty. As Javier Palomarez, Founder and CEO of the United States Hispanic Business Council, notes: “Despite Venezuela having the largest proven oil reserves in the world, the United States has imported less than 500,000 barrels of oil per day from the country since December 2018. To put that in perspective, we import a total of 8.5 million barrels a day from around the world. Increasing Venezuelan production and imports, particularly given their large amount of resources, could be a way to significantly increase American oil supply. However, this is contingent on a variety of variables, some of which are simply out of our control. American oil companies need stability, predictability, regional peace and cooperation from the people of Venezuela in order to effectively operate in the nation. While subsidies and guarantees have been floated by Trump, only time will tell if the proper infrastructure for meaningful production can be developed in the country. Years of neglect, sanctions, unrest and more have left Venezuelan oil production stunted.” In practice, Venezuelan oil matters to the U.S. less as a volume driver than as a structural input—particularly for refiners that require heavy crude to balance light shale output. Two Market Scenarios for Venezuelan Supply According to Igor Isaev, Head of the Analytics Center at Mind Money, access to Venezuelan oil affects market expectations more than global balances: “Access to Venezuelan oil by the United States is unlikely to fundamentally change the global oil balance, but it does meaningfully affect the structure of supply and market expectations. At this stage, two scenarios appear realistic. In the first scenario, the Venezuelan factor supports prices by amplifying geopolitical risk. It draws attention to vulnerabilities in other sensitive regions, most notably Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world’s oil transits. Heightened risk perception tends to widen risk premiums and support prices. In the second scenario, Venezuelan supply contributes to relative price stability rather than upside pressure. As markets adapt and additional barrels are absorbed, prices could remain range-bound around $50–60 per barrel, assuming no major shocks and continued confidence in medium-term supply. A critical element here is oil quality. Venezuela produces heavy crude, essential for deep refining and diesel production — segments where the U.S. faces a structural deficit. American output is dominated by light shale grades, while U.S. refineries require heavy crude blending for optimal utilization. In practice, only two large-scale sources exist: Canada and Venezuela. Canada’s Alberta fields are mature, with declining production rates limiting supply growth.” This framing underscores why Venezuelan oil can influence price stability or risk premiums without fundamentally altering supply-demand balances. Agriculture: An Overlooked Casualty of Energy Volatility Oil market instability has direct and often underappreciated consequences for the global agricultural sector. Fuel is a core input for modern farming, powering tractors, irrigation systems, harvesters, and transportation networks. Even modest increases in oil prices can significantly raise operating costs, particularly for energy-intensive crops. Beyond fuel, oil prices strongly influence fertilizer markets, especially nitrogen-based fertilizers derived from hydrocarbons. Energy price volatility often translates into fertilizer price spikes, squeezing farm margins and, in some regions, reducing application rates—ultimately affecting yields. Transportation is another critical channel. Global food supply chains rely on trucking, rail, and shipping. Higher fuel costs raise food prices downstream, amplifying inflationary pressure in import-dependent regions across Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. From this perspective, Venezuelan uncertainty matters less as a supply story and more as a volatility amplifier. Even limited geopolitical shocks that push oil prices higher can ripple through agricultural systems, intensifying food insecurity and political sensitivity around food prices. India: Energy Security Through Optionality India is the world’s third-largest oil consumer, importing over 85 per cent of its crude requirements to meet the needs of a rapidly growing economy. Its energy security is therefore highly sensitive to global price swings, supply disruptions, and the geopolitical dynamics of key exporters. In this context, the country’s crude import strategy emphasizes diversification, optionality, and strategic resilience rather than reliance on any single source. Indian refineries are among the most complex in the world, capable of processing a wide range of crude qualities, including Venezuelan heavy and extra-heavy grades. These refineries can handle high-sulfur crude and produce refined products such as diesel, naphtha, and jet fuel, making heavy crude an important component for optimizing throughput and output quality. Despite this capability, India has historically treated Venezuelan oil as optional diversification, not core supply. Several factors reinforce this approach: Sanctions and political risk: U.S.-led sanctions on Venezuela, coupled with broader regulatory uncertainty, limit India’s ability to rely on Venezuelan barrels for long-term planning. Any sudden tightening of sanctions or administrative hurdles can disrupt cargo delivery or financial settlements. Logistical challenges: Transporting Venezuelan crude to India is complex and costly. Routes involve long-haul shipping across the Atlantic and Indian Ocean, adding transit time, insurance costs, and exposure to maritime geopolitical risks. Production reliability: Venezuela’s oil sector has been plagued by infrastructure neglect, underinvestment, and workforce attrition, creating a supply profile that is inherently unpredictable. Even if shipments are contracted, actual delivery volumes can be uncertain. Yet, the mere potential for Venezuelan barrels to enter global markets has strategic value for India. This optionality allows the country to negotiate more favorable terms with other suppliers, particularly in the Middle East, by leveraging the perception of alternative sources. Venezuelan crude acts as a floating variable in India’s energy calculus: it can be tapped when favorable, but India is not forced to depend on it when risk is high. Furthermore, the optionality strategy aligns with India’s broader energy diversification goals, which include increasing imports from Africa, the Americas, and Central Asia, while also investing in refining partnerships and storage infrastructure domestically. By avoiding overreliance on politically sensitive sources like Venezuela, India minimizes vulnerability to shocks that could ripple through domestic fuel markets, inflation, and industrial costs. In short, Venezuelan crude offers technical advantages and strategic leverage, but India’s approach demonstrates that energy security is about flexibility and risk management—not simply accessing more barrels. In an era of global supply volatility, optionality can be as valuable as volume, particularly for a major emerging-market importer like India. A Structural Reframing of the Debate Some analysts argue that the focus on Venezuela itself overstates its importance in a world where demand dynamics are shifting. As Maria Pechurina, Director of International Trade at Peacock Tariff Consulting, argues: “Venezuela isn’t a supply story—it’s a distraction. The world already produces more oil than it needs, demand is structurally declining, and no amount of geopolitical theater can change that. Long-term oil prices won’t be set by Maduro, Trump, or sanctions, but by how fast Chinese and European drivers switch to electric vehicles. In energy markets, electrons—not egos—will decide the future.” This perspective situates Venezuela as a short-term geopolitical variable within a much larger structural transition. Conclusion: Abundance Without Assurance The global oil market today is defined by abundance without assurance. Venezuela’s reserves are vast, but their relevance is constrained by political risk, infrastructure decay, investment hesitation, and shifting long-term demand. While Venezuelan oil can influence refining economics, market psychology, and price volatility—with real consequences for sectors like agriculture—it is unlikely to fundamentally rebalance global supply. As oil markets evolve, prices will be shaped less by reserves and more by confidence, credibility, and demand transformation. In that environment, stability will depend not on who controls the barrels, but on how quickly the world’s energy system moves beyond them. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3564/why-ingredients-are-new-brand-currency-in-asias-food-markets.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3564/why-ingredients-are-new-brand-currency-in-asias-food-markets.html Tue, 03 Feb 2026 09:50:22 +0530 Cargill’s Yuchu Zhang on trust, texture, sweeteners, and how ingredient intelligence is reshaping pricing power and innovation across APAC In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Yuchu Zhang, Vice President – R&D, Cargill Food APAC, explains how ingredient perception has become central to brand trust, premiumisation, and competitive advantage in Asia’s rapidly evolving food markets. Drawing on insights from IngredienTracker, she highlights a structural shift where consumers scrutinise labels, reward familiar and natural-sounding ingredients, and are willing to pay selectively for quality, sustainability, and functionality. Yuchu discusses how manufacturers must balance advanced food science with cultural familiarity—across sweeteners, fats and oils, cocoa, and texture innovation—to drive differentiation without sacrificing affordability. Looking ahead, she underscores ingredient intelligence as a critical innovation engine, separating companies that anticipate consumer expectations from those that merely react to them. Ingredient perception has moved from the margins to the center of purchase decisions in Asia. Your data shows over 70 per cent of consumers now check ingredient labels, and more than half actively share ingredient knowledge. From Cargill’s vantage point, is this merely a transparency trend—or does it mark a deeper structural shift in how brand trust and pricing power are built in Asian food markets ? We don’t see this as a short-term transparency trend. It is a structural shift in how brand trust and pricing power are built in Asia. When over 70 per cent of consumers are checking labels and more than half are actively sharing ingredient knowledge, ingredients stop being a compliance or back-of-the-pack issue and become a front-of-mind brand asset. Trust now goes beyond the brand – it is also going into the finer print. Historically in many Asian markets, brand heritage, scale, or price were enough to secure trust. Today, consumers increasingly ‘audit’ products through ingredients before deciding if they want to consume it. Secondly, our data shows that more than 58 per cent of consumers are willing to pay a premium for products with higher-quality, sustainable, or fortified ingredients, and they convince their peers to do the same. High quality and healthy ingredients signal value. Pricing power increasingly comes from these ingredient choices that consumers are seeking and can recommend to their family and friends. For manufacturers, this means ingredient strategy is no longer just an R&D decision; it’s a core commercial and brand strategy lever. The study reveals a sharp polarity: “natural-sounding” ingredients are increasingly rewarded, while scientific or unfamiliar names face stronger backlash than in earlier waves. How should food manufacturers reconcile this consumer psychology with the growing reliance on advanced food science, functional fortification, and precision formulation—especially in categories like beverages, infant nutrition, and ready meals ? While it seems that unfamiliar or scientific names are facing stronger backlash than in previous waves, this does not reflect a rejection of food science, but rather how consumers process trust and familiarity.Asian consumers respond to the ‘naming’ of an ingredient. Its nomenclature, framing, familiarity besides the brand credibility all matter more than scientific complexity. Our experience shows that advanced functionality can be accepted when positioned through recognizable sources, everyday benefits, and consistent brand trust, rather than technical explanations. Manufacturers should not retreat from advanced food science but instead translate it into benefits consumers understand. Lead with clear health outcomes, anchor formulations in familiar sources such as plants or fermentation and simplify or localise product ingredient language to build trust and acceptance. Willingness to pay is rising—but selectively. With 58 per cent of consumers willing to pay a 10 per cent premium for higher-quality, sustainable, or nutrient-fortified ingredients, how should companies decide where to invest in premiumisation without overengineering products or eroding mass affordability in Asia’s price-sensitive markets ? According to a report by Bain, consumers in fast growing markets like China, Indonesia are more conscious of environmental and social factors than those in mature markets like Australia and Singapore, which triggers sustainable purchasing in those markets. Consumers in emerging Southeast Asian markets are prioritizing affordability and value but despite that still seek sustainability and wellness-based products. Hence, in my opinion, successful manufacturers will have to adopt a segmented premiumisation strategy. Companies should focus premium investment on key categories and ingredients that deliver maximum health/ nutrition impact, rather than on entire portfolios. Chocolate and cocoa are emerging as both indulgence and ethics categories. IngredienTracker highlights rising expectations around local sourcing, sustainability, and authenticity alongside flavor and texture innovation. Do you see cocoa in APAC evolving into a provenance-driven category—similar to coffee or wine—or will indulgence always outweigh origin storytelling ? Chocolate consumption has increased over the last several years and is projected to continue to increase.There are many factors driving the increase in chocolate consumption including experiential consumption, i.e. consumers looking for an indulgent experience rather than just a snack, and the growing availability of different varieties – provenance, low sugar, zero sugar, dark chocolate, sustainable chocolate etc. While expectations around sustainability, ethical sourcing, and local production are rising, this does not indicate a full shift toward a provenance-led category. Instead, origin and authenticity act as optional value enhancers. A large part of chocolate consumption remains driven by nostalgia. While multi-sensory experiences are driving an increase in consumption, many consumers are also choosing the brands and products they know and have grown up with. In sweeteners, “less sugar” is no longer enough—functionality now matters. With additive sweetener use in beverages rising sharply and consumers gravitating toward monk fruit, brown sugar, and cane sugar, how do you see the next phase of sweetener innovation unfolding: reformulation, metabolic health positioning, or ingredient blending strategies that balance taste, trust, and regulation ? IngredienTracker APAC 2025 shows that sugar-free and low-sugar claims are rising, with additive sweeteners in beverages increasing from 18 per cent to 29 per cent of launches across APAC. The next phase of innovation will center on ingredient blending strategies that balance taste, texture and health impact, while ensuring brand trust as well as regulatory compliance. Brands are likely to combine natural sweeteners like monk fruit or brown sugar with functional additives targeting metabolism, gut health, or immunity. Texture has become a premium signal, not just a formulation choice. Asian textures like mochi and boba are now global, and plant-based texturizers are gaining acceptance. How strategically important is texture innovation in differentiating brands today—and do you see texture becoming a stronger driver of value than flavor in certain categories ? While flavor remains the primary driver of consumption, texture has emerged as a strategic lever for differentiation. Asian-inspired textures like mochi and boba enhance the multisensory experience, creating memorable, emotionally engaging products that complement taste rather than replace it. These drives repeat purchase and premium positioning. In categories like beverages, desserts, and snacks, where flavor alone is easily replicated, thoughtful textural innovation can reinforce brand identity, encourage repeat purchase, and deepen consumer loyalty, making it a valuable tool alongside compelling flavor profiles. This strengthens brand equity, supports premium pricing, and makes products harder to replicate, translating sensory innovation directly into measurable commercial advantage. Texture also supports novelty and social sharing, generating buzz and trial. Fats and oils are being re-rated through a health and sustainability lens. As consumers scrutinize oils for cardiovascular, immunity, and clean-label benefits, how should manufacturers rethink legacy formulations—particularly in snacks and ready meals—without compromising shelf life, cost, or taste? The shift towards health and sustainability in our food is reshaping product development across food manufacturers, particularly in snacks and ready meal categories. Cargill’s category professionals not only decipher market trends that shift ingredient choices in mass consumers, but also work closely with industry category leaders to understand the trade offs of new ingredients to legacy formulas to specific consumer segments, and to provide innovative solutions to meet these consumers’ unmet needs. Cargill has a diverse fats and oil portfolio that can support the health and sustainable needs of our consumers. We have stable and heart healthy high oleic oils, blended oils that combine cost effectiveness and nutrition, specialty fats and oil fractions with enhanced performance, and nature powered oil solutions that preserve shelf life instead of synthetic preservatives. Examples include: Low-saturation frying oils (blended oils with high oleic acid), which have over 50 per cent lower saturated acid content compared to traditional frying oils without compromising stability Sunflower seed oil with zero trans fatty acids and corn oil rich in phytosterols Low-contaminant palm oil developed through process optimization and formula upgrades, and meeting EU standards Low-saturation tea beverage oils, which, compared to traditional milk fats and palm oils, are not only lower in saturated acid but also offer better value and enhance the aroma of milk tea Replacement solutions for partially hydrogenated oils, which is the primary source of industrial trans fats, that deliver comparable quality, texture, stability, and shelf life Cargill uses sensory and performance testing on fats and oils in formulas to validate the robustness of the new formulas, and develops new functional oils and delivery systems, to tailor taste, texture in application and storage. We have also invested in technology upgrades at our edible oils facilities to produce better-functioning products Our portfolio, production and category expertise provide category players in the market with taste, shelf life and cost, while addressing consumers’ evolving demand for healthy and sustainable foods IngredienTracker positions insight as an innovation engine, not just a research output. Looking ahead five years, how do you expect ingredient intelligence to reshape the competitive advantage of global ingredient suppliers—and what capabilities will separate companies that lead Asian food innovation from those that merely follow consumer sentiment ? Over the next five years, leading food brands in Asia will be those that anticipate shifts in ingredient perceptions and embed consumer intelligence directly into R&D, rather than treating it as a downstream input. Consumer sentiment and market demand are inseparable from innovation decisions. By introducing scientifically advanced ingredients through familiar, culturally relevant and trustworthy nutrition led narratives, suppliers can help customers cater to emerging consumer demands and unlock new market potential. ----- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3558/inside-cloovers-plan-to-become-shopify-of-energy.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3558/inside-cloovers-plan-to-become-shopify-of-energy.html Fri, 30 Jan 2026 13:17:49 +0530 Jodok Betschart on why execution, ecosystems and capital will define the next decade of clean power In an exclusive Agrospectrum interview, Jodok Betschart, Co-Founder & CEO of Cloover GmbH, explains why Europe has reached a critical inflection point for decentralized energy as AI-driven demand, electrification and grid instability converge. He outlines how Cloover is positioning itself as the operating system for energy independence by solving the sector’s biggest bottleneck—financing—through embedded, asset-first credit and AI-led risk assessment. Betschart also highlights the significance of Cloover’s $1.2 billion institutional financing commitment as validation of distributed energy as a new infrastructure asset class. Looking ahead, he details the company’s installer-centric ecosystem strategy and its ambition to become the global backbone for decentralized energy over the next decade. The Infrastructure Moment You describe Cloover as building the operating system for energy independence. Why is this moment—marked by AI-driven demand growth, grid instability, and electrification—the inflection point for such a platform? The current moment represents a critical inflection point for the European energy sector. Several converging megatrends are creating this “infrastructure moment”: Rising Energy Demand and Grid Instability: The European energy landscape is entering a “defining decade”. Demand is surging, driven by increasing electrification and new, energy-intensive technologies like AI data centers. Simultaneously, centralized power grids are struggling to keep pace, leading to instability and uncertainty Accelerated Electrification: The rapid adoption of electric mobility is exposing deep structural weaknesses in the existing infrastructure. Households and businesses are seeking ways to secure their energy supply and control costs, driving exponential interest in decentralized solutions like solar, batteries, and heat pumps The “Missing Link”: While demand is exploding, the scalable infrastructure to deploy these technologies efficiently is absent . Cloover is this “missing link”—an operating system that connects all stakeholders on a single platform . It is built on the core principles of being asset-first and using automation to replace manual processes, creating a financial and procedural infrastructure that enables the transition to a resilient, independent energy grid. Financing as the Bottleneck Your thesis is that financing, not technology adoption, is the biggest constraint in residential energy. What structural failures in traditional banking does Cloover’s embedded finance model address? The thesis that financing is the primary bottleneck is based on the insight that technology adoption is hindered by structural weaknesses in the traditional financial system. Our model addresses these shortcomings: Fragmentation and Lack of Specialization: Unlike mature markets like automotive, the decentralized energy asset class has few specialized lenders. Traditional banks are often ill-equipped to underwrite loans at the required speed and granularity High Upfront Costs: The significant initial investment for solar, heat pumps, or batteries is a major hurdle for many households, with long payback periods deterring adoption Outdated Credit Metrics: Banks rely on traditional credit scores. Our model, in contrast, is asset-first, focusing on the project’s future energy savings as a key evaluation factor, which allows us to serve customers who might not otherwise qualify Installer Cash Flow Constraints: Small and medium-sized installers suffer from severe cash flow problems, having to purchase expensive equipment upfront. Our principle of embedded financing solves this by integrating working capital and financing directly into their workflow, transforming it from a hurdle into a seamless feature. AI in Credit and Risk Assessment Cloover uses AI-powered underwriting focused on long-term energy savings rather than traditional credit metrics. How do you balance innovation in credit models with risk management and regulatory expectations? Balancing innovation with robust risk management is at the core of our strategy. Our philosophy is that AI’s role is to reduce friction, not to replace human judgment. This balance is achieved through a multi-layered approach: Augmented, Not Automated, Judgment: We use AI to structure complex data, automate repetitive tasks, and provide data-driven recommendations. This augments the expertise of our team, allowing for faster, better-informed decisions while maintaining human oversight. For example, our AI-powered underwriting supplements, rather than replaces, traditional credit metrics Streamlining Point-of-Sale Processes: AI automates standard checks during the application process. This allows installers to manage higher demand and provide immediate, reliable feedback to customers at the point of sale, a critical step in reducing friction Data-Driven Risk Analysis: Our platform continuously collects and analyzes real-time performance data from installed assets. This allows for dynamic risk monitoring and proactive management, enabling us to detect and address potential issues early Asset-Backed Security: The financed energy assets are real, tangible assets, providing an additional layer of security beyond the borrower’s credit profile. This positions them as a transparent, “impact-aligned infrastructure asset class” for investors Partnerships with Regulated Institutions: Our model is validated and backed by a $1.2 billion debt facility from a major European bank and a guarantee from the European Investment Fund (EIF), ensuring adherence to the highest regulatory and risk management standards. The $1.2 Billion Commitment The scale of this financing commitment is unusual for a company at this stage. What does this signal about institutional appetite for distributed energy as an infrastructure asset class? The financing commitment of over $1.2 billion is exceptional and sends several powerful signals: Validation of Distributed Energy as an Asset Class: It confirms that institutional capital now views distributed energy systems not as a niche product, but as a scalable, stable, and attractive infrastructure asset class. Confidence in the Platform Model: Investors are backing the “operating system” that makes this asset class legible and investable. Our platform provides the transparency, performance data, and risk management needed to deploy capital at scale into thousands of decentralized projects. Shift to Infrastructure Capital: The deal structure, combining venture equity with a massive debt facility, is typical of mature infrastructure companies. It signals that Cloover has successfully bridged the gap between the tech world and the capital-intensive world of infrastructure finance. A Precedent for the Industry: This deal sets a new benchmark for the industry, proving that it is possible to mobilize the capital required to meet Europe’s ambitious climate goals. The Installer-Centric Growth Model Cloover positions itself as an enabler—not a competitor—to installers. How critical is this alignment to scaling decentralized energy, and what lessons have you learned from working with thousands of SMEs? Aligning with installers as an enabler is the single most critical factor for scaling decentralized energy. The energy transition rests on the shoulders of tens of thousands of small and medium-sized installation businesses. A model that empowers them leverages the industry’s greatest resource. The crucial lesson is that scaling is an ecosystem problem. Success depends on equipping these key players with the right tools. Our platform was designed to solve their core frustrations: fragmented software, manual processes, and crippling financing bottlenecks. By providing workflow automation, embedded financing, and working capital, we become an indispensable growth engine for them. This creates a powerful win-win situation: installers grow their revenue by an average of 30 per cent, and Cloover grows with every project enabled on the platform. This symbiotic relationship, built on trust, is the engine for scalable growth. From Software to Ecosystem You’ve compared Cloover to the “Shopify of Energy.” What does ecosystem leadership mean in energy—and how do you ensure interoperability across manufacturers, installers, investors, and households? The “Shopify of Energy” comparison means that Cloover provides the core infrastructure for others to operate on. We do not own the value chain; we enable it. Ecosystem leadership is defined by the distinct roles each participant plays on this shared infrastructure. Interoperability is ensured through our API-first and modular architecture, which allows all players to connect and collaborate efficiently: Installers use the platform to sell and manage their projects Manufacturers connect their hardware and associated data streams Investors access standardized project and asset information for the deployment of capital End Customers receive simple, financed access to clean energy Cloover is the shared, interoperable layer that aligns these diverse players, ensuring they can collaborate to deliver decentralized energy at scale. Economics for End Users Homeowners reportedly see 20–30 per cent energy cost savings, while installers generate 30 per cent incremental revenue. How do you sustain these economics as you scale across markets with different subsidy and regulatory regimes? Sustaining these economics relies on a dynamic, software-driven platform, not static subsidies. The core principle is ensuring the monthly savings for a homeowner exceed the financing costs . We achieve this through: Adaptable Software: Our platform is designed to flexibly integrate different regulatory frameworks and subsidy programs. Our ability to pre-finance public subsidies is a key advantage, reducing complexity and improving the offer for the customer. Economies of Scale: As we grow, we negotiate better procurement terms, passing those savings on to installers and homeowners. AI-Powered Optimization: Post-installation, our Energy Management Systems (EMS) use AI to optimize energy generation, storage, and consumption, maximizing savings for the household over the system’s lifetime. Portfolio Diversification: Expanding across multiple European markets reduces our dependence on any single regulatory environment and diversifies risk . Global Ambition and the Road Ahead With expansion planned across Europe and ambitions beyond, what must Cloover get right over the next 24 months to become the global backbone for decentralized energy ? To set the course for global leadership, we must focus on three core areas: Excellent Execution in Geographic Scaling: This requires meticulously managing our expansion into new markets like France, Italy, and the UK . We must prove our platform can adapt to local regulations and needs while maintaining core efficiency. A “one-size-fits-all” approach will not work. Strategic Deepening of the Platform: We must continue to advance our core AI capabilities in underwriting, risk management, and energy optimization. The “AI Finance Co-Pilot” must become an indispensable tool for every installer . Furthermore, expanding post-installation services like EMS and VPP integration is crucial for maximizing long-term value. Aggressive Expansion of the Ecosystem: This involves deepening partnerships with manufacturers, broadening our base of institutional investors, and relentlessly strengthening the network effects that create a powerful moat against competitors. As our investor from MMC Ventures noted, our success has been defined by “execution” . Maintaining that focus on execution across these three areas will be the key to establishing Cloover as the global backbone for decentralized energy. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3557/agri-tech-innovations-shielding-harvests-from-climate-shocks-evelyn-long.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3557/agri-tech-innovations-shielding-harvests-from-climate-shocks-evelyn-long.html Fri, 30 Jan 2026 11:14:42 +0530 Evelyn Long is an experienced agriculture writer with a focus on sustainability, climate resilience, and boosting farm efficiency. Her expertise is featured in Morning Ag Clips and Acreage Life, where she unpacks the evolving challenges and innovations in agriculture. As editor in chief of Renovated Magazine, Evelyn advocates for smarter, more resilient farming practices. Climate change is reshaping how India and the world's agricultural sectors provide food. Unpredictable monsoons, temperature extremes and shorter growing windows disrupt traditional planting schedules, while population expansion demands bigger yields. In response, farmers are increasingly relying on technology to serve growing markets. Understanding Climate Change Indian agriculture operates close to the edge of weather variability. Shifting monsoon patterns, prolonged dry spells and sudden heat waves have made seasonal planning far less reliable than it once was. Crops such as rice and wheat — which depend heavily on stable water availability — are especially exposed. Even brief disruptions can reduce output or force costly mid-season adjustments. For small and midsized growers, the stakes are higher. A single extreme event can undo months of labor and investment. These realities are pushing the sector away from reactive recovery and toward technologies that help anticipate stress, preserve inputs and reduce losses before they compound. Farming With Data and Precision Agriculture Precision agriculture relies on real-time data to guide field-level decisions. Drones and satellite imagery help producers identify plant stress from drought, flooding or pest pressure before symptoms spread. These tools help pinpoint where irrigation or nutrients are necessary, reducing waste during periods of scarcity. Soil moisture sensors and on-farm weather stations add another layer of protection. Farmers track soil moisture and microclimate conditions with remote sensors. Precise data plots enable them to accurately determine when and how to use resources such as water to optimize growth and prevent crop failures. AI databases track soil salinity and overall quality, helping farmers determine fertilizer requirements for optimal production. Innovating Biotechnology for Climate-Resilient Crops Crop science remains one of the most effective long-term defenses against heat stress. Plant breeders increasingly focus on inbreeding traits such as heat tolerance, drought resistance and disease resilience. These new cultivars are productive even when temperatures rise and rainfall patterns shift. A slight increase — as little as 1.5°C — can affect crop productivity, especially during the plants' reproductive stage. Varieties with higher climate variability and heat tolerance produce bigger harvests even when the weather turns. Efforts to optimize millet production include crop management, since millet is ready for harvest in 65 days, and innovative methods for harvesting and threshing the seeds to produce a more palatable grain alternative. Solving Drought With Smarter Water Management Water management sits at the center of climate adaptation. Drip irrigation and precision sprinklers only water the plant roots, reducing evaporation during hot spells. Automated sprinkler systems driven by sensor data further refine this approach by adjusting delivery in response to real-time field conditions. Research shows 70 per cent water savings and 30 per cent crop yield gains when using automated watering systems with IoT connectivity. These systems can optimize the time of day for watering, track ground moisture levels with remote sensors and stabilize production cycles. Pilot projects fordrip irrigation are already underway in Gujarat, India. Adapting With Land Preparation and Soil Management Climate change alters the physical landscape and the ways farmers interact with it. Droughts, floods and pest outbreaks can leave trees and perennial plants damaged and unproductive. While no-till farming is leading the storm in climate-sensitive agriculture, removing tree trunks and root systems is essential to modern planting methods. While excavation was necessary in the past to remove a large tree trunk, stump grinders offer a mechanical advantage with less soil disturbance, thanks to the large tracks that replace wheels for stability. The latest stump grinders are maneuverable enough to fit into any field and help clear organic obstructions such as stumps and fallen branches. Protecting the Soil With Modern Mulching Techniques Soil protection plays a quieter but equally critical role in climate resilience. Mulching reduces evaporation, moderates soil temperature and limits erosion during heavy rains. While organic mulches have been used since farming began and have provided soil nutrition, water retention and plant protection, modern plastic mulches and biodegradable films increase yields further. Studies show a 28.7 per cent increase in crop yield and a 48.9 per cent increase in moisture retention in commercial-scale farming. Mulches — whether organic or biodegradable film — protect the root system from temperature fluctuations. The Future of Farming: Integrated Agri-Tech Solutions Climate resilience increasingly depends on an integrated approach rather than isolated tools. Precision monitoring, resilient plant genetics, efficient water systems and practical land management work best when deployed together. As temperature shock becomes a more likely threat, these innovations improve food stability and security. The focus has shifted from post-disaster recovery to continual preparedness so farmers and agribusinesses can act proactively and keep harvests thriving despite changing environmental conditions. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3554/fourth-industrial-revolution-at-sea-why-technology-adoption-is-real-test-for-sustainable-fisheries.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3554/fourth-industrial-revolution-at-sea-why-technology-adoption-is-real-test-for-sustainable-fisheries.html Thu, 29 Jan 2026 09:29:27 +0530 SAFET Executive Director Inga Wise explains how proven ocean technologies, if adopted at scale and tailored to local contexts, could mark a tipping point for sustainable ocean management under the UN Ocean Decade At the midpoint of the UN Ocean Decade, progress toward sustainable fisheries remains uneven—not because of a single missing piece, but due to the need for context-specific combinations of technologies, adoption pathways, and incentives, a challenge SAFET addresses through its SEA-TECH-IN-MOTION mapping tool. In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Inga Wise, Executive Director of SAFET, describes the current moment as a “Fourth Industrial Revolution at Sea,” marked by the availability of proven technologies and a critical shift from pilots to real-world adoption. Inga notes that tools such as satellite surveillance, AI-driven behavioral analysis, and in-situ sensors are already demonstrating impact against IUU fishing, though broader deployment is still constrained by structural, economic, and governance barriers. Ultimately, she emphasizes that SAFET’s role is not to dictate priorities or metrics, but to enable informed decision-making by showing how technology can support measurable progress toward established global frameworks like the UN Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 14. At the midpoint of the UN Ocean Decade, progress appears uneven. From SAFET’s vantage point, where is the gap largest today—technology availability, adoption by industry, regulatory alignment, or political will—and what evidence most clearly supports that assessment? From SAFET’s perspective, there is no single gap that, if overcome, will unblock progress. Every context is different, and each situation requires a different solution or combination of technologies to be successful. This is why SAFET’s SEA-TECH-IN-MOTION map exists, to highlight as broad a cross section of solutions in different contexts as possible to enable implementers to find the most relevant parallels to their situation to learn from.  Your report frames this moment as a “Fourth Industrial Revolution at Sea.” What differentiates this technological wave from earlier digitization efforts in fisheries, and why should decision-makers believe this time will deliver systemic change rather than incremental improvements? Whilst the Fourth Industrial Revolution at sea has been building for some time with technologies being developed and tested in various situations, we are now approaching a critical point where there are sufficient proven technologies available and the focus now needs to shift to support regarding adoption. By highlighting where technologies have been most successfully used, SAFET aims to enable faster adoption and reduce the need to reinvent the wheel. Giving potential adopters of solutions examples that relate to their challenges and pathways that relate to their goals enables informed choices that are right for their requirement. Illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing remains stubbornly pervasive. Which technologies highlighted in the report have demonstrated the strongest real-world impact against IUU fishing, and what structural barriers still prevent their wider deployment? There are a wide range of technologies now in use that have been proven effective against IUU fishing, including satellite surveillance, AI behavioural analysis, in-situ sensors, and many more. To date, many deployments have been of a pilot nature. We are now seeing a more widespread adoption, which in turn will reduce opportunities for IUU catch to enter the supply chain.  SEA-TECH-IN-MOTION emphasizes real-world case studies over theoretical promise. In reviewing deployments globally, what patterns separate successful implementations from those that underperform or stall—and what lessons should governments and industry leaders draw before investing? One of the main lessons we have seen is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution.  Each context and challenge area is different and what worked for a technology deployment in one situation may not work in another. Hence, with our new tool, SEA-TECH-IN-MOTION, we provide filters where the viewer can choose desired outcome, species, geographic location, and more to find projects that relate to their needs.  Consumer trust and traceability are central themes, yet mislabeling rates remain high. Is the challenge primarily technological, economic, or cultural within supply chains—and how realistic is full transparency at scale by 2030? The factors contributing to mislabelling vary across seafood supply chains, which are often complex and fragmented. As a result, the challenge is not confined to a single dimension, but reflects an interaction between technological, economic, and cultural elements.Technology can significantly improve traceability by reducing manual data entry, improving data accuracy, and enabling better data sharing across supply chain segments, but it is not sufficient on its own. Its impact depends on consistent use, data quality, and alignment across diverse actors. At the same time, economic and cultural factors — such as incentives, governance, and standardised data sharing practices — shape how effectively technology is integrated into daily operations. Looking to 2030, full transparency at scale represents an ambitious objective, with progress likely to depend on continued alignment across technological, economic, and cultural factors. Sustainability goals often collide with short-term commercial pressures. How can SAFET’s work help align economic incentives for fishers and seafood companies with long-term ecosystem health, particularly in developing coastal economies? We approach this primarily as an independent, information-sharing role rather than as an implementer. Our work focuses on raising awareness of solutions that contribute to broader sustainability goals and on improving understanding of what tools and approaches are available, how they can be adopted, and where they may be most relevant. By bringing together this information in one place, we aim to make it easier for fisheries, seafood companies, and other industry stakeholders to explore options that align operational needs with sustainability concerns. In many cases, it is already clear that some kind of technology solution is required, but it can be difficult to navigate the various options and understand how a given solution relates to the outcomes required. Our work aims to help clarify those options and outcomes, so those seeking solutions can make informed decisions that fit their local context and commercial realities.   The report highlights more than 10 enabling technologies. If forced to prioritize, which two or three technologies should receive immediate global focus—and which widely discussed solutions do you believe are currently overhyped? As an independent organisation, SAFET’s goal is not to prioritise but to provide the information about where and when these technologies have been successfully deployed to support sustainability initiatives. Given that every situation is different, it is more important that implementers have access to the information we gather to find technologies relevant to their own initiatives and make decisions accordingly.  Looking ahead to 2030 and beyond, success will be judged by outcomes, not intent. What specific, measurable changes would convince you that the seafood and fisheries sector has truly crossed a tipping point toward sustainable ocean management? This is a good question, but we would be cautious about defining specific metrics ourselves. Progress toward sustainable ocean management is already framed through established, measurable indicators, particularly those set out under the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, including SDG 14.  The role of SAFET is not to define success, but to highlight how different technologies can contribute to demonstrable progress against these shared frameworks as more implementation examples emerge.  ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3544/agriculture-isnt-just-load-its-grid-infrastructure.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3544/agriculture-isnt-just-load-its-grid-infrastructure.html Fri, 23 Jan 2026 09:21:31 +0530 How agricultural load flexibility can compete with peaker plants, batteries, and grid upgrades—at a fraction of the cost Agricultural flexibility isn’t a temporary workaround—it’s a permanent pillar of the future grid. As renewables increase and variability becomes the norm, the grid needs distributed, dispatchable flexibility everywhere, and farms are uniquely positioned to provide it. Yield’s roadmap expands beyond irrigation into a broader portfolio of farm DERs, orchestrated like a virtual power plant. In an exclusive Agrospectrum interview, Tyler Nuss, CEO of Yield Energy, explains why farmers aren’t just energy users—they’re infrastructure partners in the energy transition. Agriculture as Grid Infrastructure You describe agriculture as a new class of grid resource. What would need to change in utility planning, market rules, or regulatory frameworks for agricultural load flexibility to be treated on par with traditional infrastructure like peaker plants or batteries? Utilities need to formally recognize flexible load as capacity—not just generation. That means valuing demand-side resources based on performance, predictability, and response speed rather than asset type. Agriculture already represents large, concentrated loads—irrigation alone accounts for roughly 1 per cent of U.S. electricity use. With the right market rules, those loads can deliver grid services faster and at far lower cost than building new infrastructure. What’s changing now is visibility and control. Platforms like Yield Edge DERMS make agricultural flexibility measurable, dispatchable, and verifiable, allowing it to be planned and relied on just like peaker plants or batteries. Reliability vs. Variability Risk Farming operations are inherently seasonal and weather-dependent. How do you ensure the reliability and predictability of agricultural load as a grid resource, particularly during extreme weather events when the grid is most stressed? Reliability comes from program design and automation that respect farm operations. Farmers only enroll in programs that work for their crop, season, and geography, and participation is automated through equipment they already use. The results speak for themselves: across thousands of enrolled devices, Yield has delivered an average of 100 per cent performance in demand response dispatches and demonstrated 67 per cent load-shift potential during peak hours. Extreme weather is exactly when flexible load is most valuable. Our platform coordinates assets so utilities get predictable response, while growers retain full control of which programs they opt-in to. Scalability Beyond California California has unique regulatory incentives and grid conditions. What barriers—technical, regulatory, or economic—do you anticipate when scaling this model nationally or internationally, and how central is policy alignment to your growth strategy? California is a leading market, but the underlying drivers—load growth, electrification, and the need for fast, cost-effective capacity—are global. The biggest barriers are regulatory recognition and program availability, not technology. Yield Edge is hardware-agnostic and built to integrate with existing farm automation systems, which allows us to scale quickly wherever utilities are ready to engage agriculture. Policy alignment accelerates adoption, but our strategy is focused on proving performance. When utilities see consistent results, programs follow. Comparative Economics of Flexibility You position agricultural load flexibility as cheaper and faster than new storage or grid upgrades. How do the economics compare on a per-megawatt basis over time, especially once transaction, integration, and farmer participation costs are fully accounted for? Agricultural flexibility avoids the largest cost drivers of traditional infrastructure: long development timelines and capital-intensive buildouts. Because Yield integrates with equipment farmers already own, deployment costs are low and timelines are measured in months, not years. Utilities gain capacity at a fraction of the cost of new generation or transmission, while growers earn $20–30k annually through demand response or save 10–20 per cent on energy bills through dynamic rates. That combination—low cost, fast deployment, and dual-sided value—is what makes agricultural flexibility economically compelling over time. Farmer Incentives and Risk Allocation How are operational and financial risks shared between Yield Energy, utilities, and growers—particularly if grid dispatch conflicts with critical farm activities or if utility programs change over time? Growers are always in control. Participation is voluntary, program-based, and aligned with operational realities. We don’t enroll farmers in programs that could disrupt their operations. Yield handles program design, enrollment, and performance management, while utilities pay for flexible capacity via our DERMS platform. If a grower needs to opt out due to operational constraints, they can do so. This structure ensures risk is shared appropriately and that growers benefit financially without taking on undue operational risk. Data, Control, and Cybersecurity As you aggregate and control thousands of on-farm devices, how do you address concerns around data ownership, cybersecurity, and operational control—especially for growers wary of external interference in farm systems? We’re very deliberate about this: growers own their data, we don’t sell it, and only the minimum required information is shared for program participation and verification. The platform is built with strong cybersecurity controls, secure integrations with trusted AgTech partners, and continuous monitoring. Most importantly, growers define the operating guardrails and always retain override control—if anything is uncertain, the system defaults back to normal farm operations. Market Design and Equity Do you see a risk that flexibility markets disproportionately reward large, capital-intensive farms while leaving smaller growers behind, and how does Yield Energy design its platform to ensure broad participation across farm sizes? Agriculture’s strength lies in aggregation. Yield enables farms of all sizes to participate by pooling flexible load into unified resources that meet utility thresholds. Because participation leverages existing equipment, smaller growers can access the same programs without new capital investment. Our goal is to make flexibility revenue and savings accessible across the agricultural spectrum—not just to the largest operations. Long-Term Grid Transition Is agricultural flexibility a transitional solution to bridge current grid constraints, or do you see it as a permanent pillar of a decarbonized grid—and how does that vision influence your product roadmap and partnerships? Agricultural flexibility isn’t a stopgap—it’s a permanent pillar of the future grid. As renewables grow and electrification accelerates, the grid needs fast, distributed, dispatchable flexibility everywhere, and agriculture is one of the largest and most controllable load categories that can provide it through VPP-style orchestration without disrupting operations. That belief drives our roadmap to expand beyond irrigation into a broader farm DER portfolio (cold storage, charging, solar, batteries, generation) and to deepen hardware-agnostic partnerships with AgTech automation platforms so growers can participate seamlessly at scale. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3522/from-estate-to-algorithm-how-canopy-is-turning-coffee-farms-into-climate-ready-intelligence-systems.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3522/from-estate-to-algorithm-how-canopy-is-turning-coffee-farms-into-climate-ready-intelligence-systems.html Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:15:10 +0530 A second-generation planter and AI researcher explains how lived plantation wisdom, satellite intelligence, and public–private collaboration are reshaping Indian coffee from the ground up In an exclusive interview with Agrospectrum, Sooraj Kandathil Babu, Founder & CEO of NeuBiom Labs and a second-generation coffee planter with a deep research background in AI, explains how lived estate experience shaped Canopy, a satellite- and AI-driven crop intelligence platform built for real plantation decisions. He discusses how Canopy converts traditional field intuition into digital twins that strengthen climate resilience, improve quality consistency, and enable traceability and collective bargaining for growers and FPOs. The conversation also highlights why affordable deep tech, public–private collaboration, and long-term data partnerships are essential to stabilising incomes and future-proofing Indian coffee amid increasing climate volatility. From Estate to Algorithm You are a second-generation coffee planter building a deep-tech platform rooted in satellite intelligence and AI. What specific pain points from your own plantation experience shaped Canopy’s architecture, and how did you translate traditional field intuition into a scalable digital “crop intelligence” model ? Most people experience coffee only as a finished product, something ordered at a café or picked off a supermarket shelf. What remains largely invisible is the one-year crop cycle that shapes that cup. When you spend time on plantations, the contrast becomes stark. I have seen two adjacent estates, with similar soil and climate, produce vastly different outcomes, one yielding 15 bags per acre, the other nearly double. The difference is rarely geography; it is almost always practice. How growers observe their farms, when they intervene, and how consistently they follow scientific cultivation principles. That gap in outcomes was the first pain point that shaped Canopy’s architecture. Traditional plantation wisdom is rich, but it is often unrecorded. We began by digitising this intuition through what we call a plantation journal, a structured cultivation diary that captures day-to-day farm activities. These records are then analysed alongside local weather patterns and satellite-derived plantation health indicators, allowing us to correlate practices with outcomes and provide context-specific advisories rather than generic recommendations. The second challenge is climate resilience. Coffee is a climate-sensitive crop grown predominantly in regions already exposed to significant climate risk. Multiple studies indicate that many current coffee-growing regions could become unsuitable by 2050 if cultivation practices remain unchanged. This makes climate-resilient growing not optional, but essential. Canopy maps how each grower approaches cultivation and aligns those practices with globally recognised sustainable frameworks, translating abstract climate principles into actionable, plot-level guidance. Quality and market value form the third pillar. Our goal is not to turn every grower into a specialty coffee producer overnight, but to enable clusters of growers to achieve uniform, reliable quality over time. Through Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs), a standardised package of practices can be deployed across hundreds of farms, improving outturn, grading consistency, and ultimately bargaining power in trade. Canopy supports this with transparent, traceable data that builds credibility across the value chain. Finally, there is technology adoption itself. Agriculture has long lagged behind other sectors in leveraging data and digital tools, despite being one of the most foundational industries. We believe technology, when applied sensibly and with a low barrier to entry, can only strengthen farming systems. Data-driven agriculture has proven its value globally; our focus is on adapting it to Indian conditions, starting with coffee, and earning trust gradually as growers see tangible benefits on their land. Canopy is, at its core, an attempt to translate field-level intuition into scalable crop intelligence, bridging the gap between estate wisdom and algorithmic insight, while keeping the grower firmly at the centre of the system. To add to that, both the founders of NeuBiom Labs come from a strong research background in artificial intelligence and user-centered engineering. My co-founder, Dr. Sooraj Krishna, holds a PhD in AI from Sorbonne University in France, and I am in the final stages of completing my PhD in AI at the University of Würzburg in Germany. In many ways, NeuBiom Labs is the outcome of applying rigorous academic research to the foundational problems we encounter every day on the ground, bridging deep science with real-world agricultural challenges. The Digital Twin Question Canopy creates a “digital twin” of each coffee plot. For growers and industry stakeholders, what decisions become materially better with this digital twin, yield forecasting, pest management, climate risk, or input optimisation, and where have you seen the strongest early impact? The real value of a digital twin is not in any single metric, but in how it improves decision-making across the crop cycle. For growers, Canopy’s digital twin functions as a living health report of each plot. It brings together local weather patterns, satellite-derived vegetative indices, soil indicators, and on-ground cultivation practices into a single, coherent view of plantation health. This allows growers to clearly understand what is affecting their crop and where intervention is needed. Based on this, the system recommends context-specific practices and provides short-term weather forecasts that help growers time their operations more effectively. For FPOs and grower collectives, the digital twin operates at a different scale. Instead of managing farms in isolation, FPOs gain a portfolio-level view of member plantations through comparable health and activity scores. This makes it possible to benchmark performance across growers, identify gaps early, and align field activities with organisational goals. For example, an FPO aiming to promote organic or low-input cultivation can push standardised practices across its members and monitor adoption over time. This structured approach significantly improves consistency in quality and outturn, which directly strengthens collective bargaining power in the market. At this stage, our strongest early impact has been in plantation visibility, practice standardisation, and operational planning for growers and FPOs. Coffee’s annual crop cycle means that advanced outcomes such as yield forecasting, early disease detection, and precise input optimisation require longitudinal data. As we complete full-cycle datasets across a growing number of plantations, these capabilities naturally become more robust and predictive. Ultimately, the digital twin evolves from a monitoring tool into a decision-confidence layer, supporting not just growers and FPOs, but also future stakeholders across trade, finance, and compliance, once the system is grounded in real, season-long plantation intelligence. Affordable Deep Tech: The Rs 2,999 Disruption Enterprise-grade crop intelligence globally is often priced far beyond the reach of smallholders. How did NeuBiom Labs engineer a platform that delivers satellite, AI and hyperlocal insights at Rs 2,999 per crop cycle without compromising data accuracy or depth? Affordability was not an afterthought for us; it was a design constraint from day one. If we want meaningful outcomes such as early disease detection or reliable yield forecasting, the system has to achieve wide-scale adoption. That simply isn’t possible if enterprise-grade crop intelligence remains priced beyond the reach of small and mid-sized growers. A large part of how we achieve this is through ecosystem leverage. NeuBiom Labs is incubated at the Atal Incubation Center at the Coffee Board of India, and the Agri Business Incubator at Kerala Agriculture University, and we are also part of the Google for Startups India. These institutions provide critical support in the form of infrastructure, cloud credits, research access, and grants, which allow us to subsidise costs during the adoption phase without compromising on data quality or analytical depth. Equally important is how we’ve engineered the platform itself. We made a conscious decision not to over-engineer the stack. Instead of building complex, expensive systems that look impressive on paper, we focused on crisp, purpose-driven tools that directly serve agronomic decision-making. This keeps compute costs low, workflows efficient, and insights actionable, ensuring the stakeholders pay only for value they can actually use. User-centred engineering is the third pillar. Over the past year, we co-developed Canopy alongside 23 progressive coffee growers, spending extensive time on plantations to understand how decisions are made in real conditions. This helped us strip away unnecessary complexity and design interfaces and insights that align with how growers think and operate, rather than forcing them to adapt to technology. Ultimately, the Rs 2,999 pricing is not about undercutting the market, it’s about building trust and momentum. Once growers experience the tangible benefits of data-driven cultivation, we see compounding impact: better practices, improved quality and yield, richer datasets, and increasingly powerful intelligence across seasons. That virtuous cycle is what allows deep tech to remain both affordable and scalable in Indian agriculture. Climate Volatility and Coffee’s New Risk Curve Indian coffee faces increasing stress from erratic rainfall, temperature spikes and pest outbreaks. How does Canopy move beyond reactive advisories to predictive risk management, and can it realistically stabilise incomes for small and marginal coffee growers? True, climate volatility has fundamentally altered the risk curve for coffee in India. Erratic rainfall, temperature spikes, and shifting pest dynamics are no longer exceptions, they are the new normal. Yet, despite these changes, a large proportion of small and marginal growers continue to rely on traditional calendars and inherited practices that were designed for a far more stable climate. Canopy moves beyond reactive advisories by anchoring decision-making in context. Each plantation is geo-tagged, allowing advisories to be localised rather than regional averages. More importantly, like we discussed before, the system continuously maps the grower’s cultivation practices through a structured plantation journal and correlates these actions with evolving local weather patterns and plantation health indicators. Advisories are generated not just based on “what the weather is,” but on how the grower is farming under those conditions. This is where predictive risk management begins. Instead of responding after damage occurs, growers start to see patterns, how certain practices amplify climate stress, while others buffer against it. Our systems are trained on authenticated and certified coffee cultivation practices relevant to Indian conditions, ensuring that recommendations are agronomically sound and locally applicable. The impact is not instantaneous. Climate resilience is built over a crop cycle, not in a single intervention. But as growers become more aware of ground realities and begin making data-driven decisions, timing operations better, adjusting inputs, and avoiding unnecessary stress on the plant, we see measurable improvements in crop health, consistency, and outturn. Over time, this translates into better quality and more predictable volumes, which directly strengthens growers’ bargaining power. Income stabilisation, especially for smallholders, becomes far more realistic when this approach is adopted at scale, ideally through FPOs or farmer collectives. At the collective level, risk is no longer borne by isolated individuals. Uniform practices, shared intelligence, and aggregated quality enable more stable market positioning, even in volatile climatic conditions. NeuBiom Labs or Canopy does not claim to eliminate climate risk. What it does is convert uncertainty into informed action, helping growers shift from reactive survival to proactive resilience, one crop cycle at a time. From Farm to Federation: Scaling Beyond the Plot Farmer Producer Organisations, cooperatives and boards need aggregated intelligence, not just farm-level dashboards. How does Canopy translate dispersed plot-level data into decision-grade insights for institutions managing thousands of growers across regions? We see this challenge very clearly, and addressing it is central not just to Canopy, but to the broader mission of NeuBiom Labs. If you look at a region like Wayanad alone, there are over 60,000 coffee growers. Yet how they cultivate, the practices they follow, the health of their plantations, and their evolving responses to climate stress remain largely undocumented and fragmented. This makes coordinated intervention at an institutional level extremely difficult. As a side note, this also means, the traditional and indigenous knowledge our seniors developed with their years of experience on the ground are undocumented. These insights exist largely in memory and practice, not in records. If this knowledge is not captured now, an entire generation of experiential wisdom risks being lost. In parallel with building Canopy, we are consciously working to document and structure this lived knowledge, so future growers have a foundation to build on rather than starting from scratch. Canopy is intentionally designed as a layered intelligence stack, not just a farm dashboard. The mobile app and institutional dashboard are only the visible interfaces. Beneath them sits a core AI layer that includes domain-specific GIS inference engines and a language model fine-tuned exclusively for coffee cultivation. This layer synthesises dispersed plot-level data, activities, health indicators, weather exposure, and spatial patterns, into structured, comparable signals. As adoption scales, this enables institutions such as FPOs, cooperatives, and boards to move from anecdotal understanding to evidence-backed decision-making. Instead of asking what is happening, they can ask why it is happening, where intervention will have the highest impact, and which practices consistently produce better outcomes. This allows for region-wise benchmarking, optimisation of input distribution, targeted extension efforts, and early identification of systemic risks affecting quality or yield. More importantly, this intelligence operates upstream. Institutions can intervene at the practice level, well before harvest, by pushing standardised packages, adjusting advisory focus, or aligning growers toward specific quality or sustainability goals. Over time, this can raise average yield per region, improve uniformity of produce, and significantly strengthen market positioning. What Canopy offers today is the foundation, bringing stakeholders into a shared, data-driven framework for farming. The stack is deliberately built to evolve. As datasets mature across full crop cycles and adoption deepens, the intelligence shifts from descriptive to predictive, and from operational support to strategic planning. In that sense, scaling beyond the plot is not an add-on feature; it is the natural outcome of designing agriculture as a system rather than a collection of isolated farms. Traceability as a Trade Weapon With Europe and other premium markets tightening sustainability, deforestation and origin norms, traceability is fast becoming non-negotiable. How does Canopy’s end-to-end tracking position Indian coffee against competitors like Brazil, Vietnam and Colombia in compliance-heavy global markets? India is currently classified as a low-risk origin under emerging regulations such as the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR). However, low risk does not automatically translate into market access, especially in premium and compliance-heavy export markets that are increasingly dominated by large, vertically integrated players. For India’s predominantly smallholder-driven coffee sector, traceability becomes the key enabler to participate on equal footing. Canopy positions traceability not as a post-harvest paperwork exercise, but as a cultivation-first system. Wide adoption of the Canopy stack allows FPOs to standardise coffee cultivation practices across hundreds of small growers, while ensuring farm-level quality control and transparent activity records. This creates verifiable evidence of how coffee is grown, not just where it comes from. From a global trade perspective, this is critical. Competing origins like Brazil, Vietnam, and Colombia benefit from scale, mechanisation, and consolidated supply chains. India’s strength lies elsewhere, in shade-grown systems, biodiversity-friendly cultivation, and smallholder domination. Canopy translates these inherent advantages into structured, auditable data that buyers and regulators can trust. By maintaining traceable records from plot-level practices through harvest, the platform will soon support compliance with EUDR and other sustainability frameworks, while simultaneously building credibility for certifications and responsible sourcing claims. Over time, this shifts Indian coffee from being viewed as a fragmented supply to a verified, institutionally backed origin, capable of commanding premium pricing rather than competing purely on volume. As the Canopy ecosystem matures, its stakeholders naturally expand, from growers and FPOs to exporters, buyers, financiers, and compliance bodies, each drawing value from the same shared source of truth. In that sense, traceability becomes more than a regulatory requirement; it becomes a strategic trade instrument that allows Indian coffee to compete, differentiate, and negotiate from a position of strength in global markets. Public–Private Synergy in Agri-Tech Canopy’s launch at the CCRI centenary, with backing from the Coffee Board, AIC-CCRI and global ecosystem partners, signals a rare convergence of science, policy and start-ups. What role should public institutions play in accelerating the adoption of crop intelligence platforms at scale? The support we’ve received so far has been exceptional and deeply collaborative. Institutions such as Kerala Startup Mission, the Agri Business Incubator at Kerala Agricultural University, the Atal Incubation Center at the Coffee Board, Google for Startups, Wadhwani Foundation, EarthOn Foundation, our academic institutions, and, most importantly, the growers and FPOs we work with, have all contributed meaningfully to Canopy’s evolution. This convergence of policy, science, and entrepreneurship is exactly what agriculture needs at this moment. At a broader level, public institutions play a pivotal role in accelerating adoption of crop intelligence platforms by acting as trusted intermediaries. For most farmers, especially smallholders, technology adoption is not just a cost decision, it is a trust decision. When awareness and capacity-building programmes are led or endorsed by public institutions, it significantly reduces hesitation and shortens adoption cycles. Messaging around why data-driven cultivation matters, both in the short term for productivity and in the long term for climate resilience and market access, carries far greater credibility when it comes from institutional voices. Beyond awareness, public institutions can act as scale catalysts. Financial support in the form of grants, pilot subsidies, or outcome-linked incentives for using intelligent farming systems can dramatically accelerate adoption without burdening growers. This is particularly important in early phases, where benefits accrue over a crop cycle rather than immediately. Central bodies such as the Coffee Board of India and regional agricultural research centres can also serve as nodal intelligence hubs. By aggregating anonymised, region-level insights from platforms like Canopy, they can monitor ground-level deltas, identify systemic risks, refine extension strategies, and feed real-world data back into policy and research. Ultimately, public institutions don’t need to build technology themselves, but they can create the conditions for it to scale responsibly. By combining trust, standard-setting, financial support, and feedback mechanisms, they can ensure that crop intelligence platforms move from isolated pilots to national agricultural infrastructure. The Long View: Canopy Beyond Coffee Is Canopy a coffee-specific solution, or the foundation of a broader plantation intelligence stack? Over the next five years, how do you envision NeuBiom Labs evolving, across crops, geographies, or even into climate-linked finance and sustainability certification ecosystems? Today, Canopy is intentionally coffee-specific. Coffee is a climate-sensitive, globally traded crop with a long production cycle and complex stakeholder dynamics, which makes it an ideal starting point. But structurally, Canopy is designed as the foundation of a broader plantation intelligence stack, particularly for climate-sensitive cash crops where resilience, quality consistency, and traceability are becoming non-negotiable. For us, technology is not the end goal; it is the accelerator. The real determinant of success lies in operations, how deeply and effectively we work with growers, FPOs, and institutional stakeholders on the ground. Agriculture does not lend itself well to a simple “build-and-sell” software model. Our belief is that meaningful outcomes emerge only when platforms like Canopy are deployed as long-term partnerships, where data, practices, and incentives evolve together over time. Over the next five years, we see NeuBiom Labs expanding along three clear dimensions. First is geographic expansion, moving from regional depth to multi-region intelligence, where patterns and risks can be understood at landscape and corridor levels rather than isolated farms. Second is crop expansion, applying the same intelligence framework to other climate-sensitive plantation crops that share similar characteristics: long gestation periods, smallholder dominance, and exposure to climate and market volatility. The third dimension is ecosystem integration. As datasets mature across crop cycles, Canopy naturally becomes relevant to adjacent systems, climate-linked finance, sustainability certification, compliance reporting, and institutional risk assessment. When cultivation data is reliable, longitudinal, and traceable, it reduces uncertainty not just for growers, but also for buyers, lenders, insurers, and policymakers. In that sense, Canopy’s long view is not about becoming a one-size-fits-all platform, but about enabling a shared, data-driven workflow across agriculture. As stakeholders evolve, the stack evolves with them, ensuring that value is created collectively, and that the benefits of intelligence compound across the entire agricultural ecosystem. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3509/from-additives-to-spices-cac48-redraws-rules-of-global-food-trade.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3509/from-additives-to-spices-cac48-redraws-rules-of-global-food-trade.html Thu, 08 Jan 2026 11:50:16 +0530 Codex and FAO officials detail how updated standards aim to protect consumers without triggering disproportionate trade disruption for export-dependent economies In an exclusive Agrospectrum and NUFFOODS Spectrum interview with global food-standards leaders — Sarah Cahill, Codex Secretary; Lingping Zhang, Food Standards Officer, Codex Secretariat; Markus Lipp, Senior Food Safety Officer, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); Gracia Brisco, Food Standards Officer, Codex Secretariat; and Hilde Kruse, Senior Food Standards Officer, Codex Secretariat — CAC48 emerges as a decisive moment for Codex amid rising geopolitical fragmentation. The experts reaffirm Codex’s science-based, consensus-driven mandate, which shaped major reforms including additive reviews, aflatoxin updates, pesticide-residue reference guidelines and new maximum lead levels for spices. They underline how improved Codes of Practice, surveillance support and harmonised quality parameters enable consumer protection while minimising trade disruption for export-reliant economies. Looking ahead, they highlight the Codex Strategic Plan 2026–2031, which places digital traceability, climate-risk foresight, and advanced analytical technologies at the core of modernising global food safety governance. Edited excerpts; Codex at a Geopolitical Crossroads The 48th Session saw critical standards adopted across additives, contaminants, and fresh-produce quality. At a time when food systems face geopolitical fragmentation, supply-chain shocks, and rising protectionism, how does Codex ensure these standards remain science-led, globally harmonized, and insulated from political pressure? The Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) is a Member-driven body with its commitment to a science-based approach to standard setting enshrined in its procedures. Its work is guided by its strategic goals, and its core values of collaboration, inclusiveness, consensus building and transparency. Codex texts are the benchmark for food safety under the World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) and are relevant to the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) where WTO members refer to harmonization with international standards such as the Codex Alimentarius for food-related issues such as labelling. Codex standards play an important role in addressing specific trade concerns or for dispute settlement cases. Wherever you are, whatever you do, safe food is an everyday need. And it is a global commodity. These aspects are integral to every discussion in the Codex Alimentarius Commission. “Together” was also the theme of CAC48, which served to highlight that when it comes to food safety and quality it is only by working together that we can effectively and efficiently ensure food is safe and of good quality.  The GSFA Overhaul: Science, Safety, and Consumer Trust More than 500 food additive provisions were reviewed, leading to revocations and new inclusions. What principles guided the reassessment—particularly for colourants like annatto extracts—and how does FAO ensure regulators and industry transition smoothly to these updated provisions without disrupting product availability or trade flows? All Codex work is conducted following approval by CAC. Thus, the decision for reassessment was taken by Members. In the case of annatto extracts, this decision was based on: The need to align the General standard for food additives with relevant sections of commodity standards. In this case, for example, there was a need to align with the Standard for fermented milks, which does not provide for the addition of annatto extracts in plain milk. Codex texts are developed through consensus by all its Members in a deliberate manner that often spans a timeframe of several years. The national Codex contact points serve as a primary node to disseminate all applicable information to national stakeholders. In addition, FAO provides support when requested by Member Countries to strengthen national Codex structures, thereby enhancing national capabilities in disseminating all relevant Codex texts to national stakeholders. Aflatoxins in Peanuts: New Science, New Responsibilities The revised Code of Practice on aflatoxins integrates updated agronomic science, maturity-stage tables, and roasting effects. How will FAO help producing countries—especially smallholder-dependent economies—translate these best practices into field-level change? Are new surveillance, extension, or capacity-building mechanisms planned? FAO stays ready to support its members needs and will respond to requests by its members for additional capacity building measures correspondingly. FAO and Codex furthermore have published numerous guidance documents, codes of practice and related texts that is publicly available, ready to be used by any other organization that would like to use this information in order to support producers of peanuts. Lead Limits in Spices: Balancing Public Health and Trade facilitation With new maximum levels now set for dried bark (cinnamon) and culinary herbs, exporting nations such as —India, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Indonesia—face compliance pressure. How does Codex balance the dual mandate of protecting consumers health while ensuring fair practices in trade, in this case, preventing trade disruptions for economies reliant on spice exports? The mandate to protect consumer health and ensure fair practices in the food trade is the statutory purpose of CAC. This means that, when it comes to food safety standards such as maximum levels for contaminants in foods, CAC will not establish more stringent measures than necessary to protect consumers health so that the measures themselves do not become a technical barrier to trade which may then translate in trade disruption that may impact economic growth and ultimately food security.   Although spices and culinary herbs are consumed in small amounts, as opposed to other foods, it remains important to assess the safety of lead levels in these foods due to the impact of lead toxicity on human health that may include neurodevelopmental effects such as decreases in Intelligence Quota (IQ) and attention span in children, impaired renal function, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, impaired fertility, and adverse pregnancy outcomes and therefore the ALARA continued to apply when CCCF discusses risk management considerations related to health and trade so that while ensuring the safety of the food, this does not imply high rejections rate of lot consignments, at import control point. CCCF does provide support to Codex Members to enable them to comply with MLs, by developing codes of practice, a compendium of risk management measures and practices to assist in reducing food contamination, in this case CAC40 adopted in 2017 the Code of practice for the prevention and reduction of mycotoxins in spices (CXC 78-2017). FAO does have a role to play in assisting countries with the implementation of the CoP, helping them to identify specific risk management measures that may not be included in the CoP, as they are usually overarching texts, that can complement the measures applicable worldwide that are described in these CoPs. The Codex Alimentarius Commission has now adopted MLs for lead in spices and culinary herbs, specifically, dried bark (cinnamon) and dried culinary herbs. The MLs are 2.5 mg/kg for lead in spices, dried bark and 2.0 mg/kg for lead in culinary herbs, dried and will now be added to the General Standard for contaminants and toxins in food and feed (CXS 193-1995).  Pesticide Reference Materials: A Quiet but Critical Reform The guidelines allowing extended use of pesticide reference materials beyond labelled expiry dates could significantly reduce laboratory costs and waste. What drove this reform? And how does FAO envision it strengthening residue monitoring systems in low- and middle-income countries where testing infrastructure remains limited? Pesticide residues in food are a subject of particular concern for consumers and in the food trade. To ensure the safety of food, the regulation of pesticide use, and relevant residues, must be enforced and guaranteed. Part of the process of testing for pesticide residues relies on laboratories being able to access what are known as reference materials, or RMs. But these are costly and sold with 2-to-5-year short-term expiry dates, though there is no requirement to find maximum shelf life. This can force laboratories to buy new RMs more frequently than potentially necessary. This leads to additional work and additional costs, and that can hinder how much testing can be done.  The Codex Alimentarius Commission has now adopted guidelines that provide a scientifically sound framework to monitor the purity and stability of reference materials under defined conditions, which, if implemented correctly, may allow continued use of RMs beyond their expiry date - where purity remains within acceptable limits. This reduces recurring costs, minimizes waste, and ensures confidence in the reliability of pesticide residue analysis.  The work on the development of guidelines for monitoring the purity and stability of reference materials of pesticides during prolonged storage commenced at CCPR51 in 2019, when some delegations expressed concerns regarding the limitation of the use of reference materials beyond the expiry date, leading to significant recurring costs for laboratories. As chair of the electronic working group (EWG), India led the work to develop these guidelines. FAO stays ready to support its members needs and will respond to requests by its members for additional capacity building measures correspondingly.  Read more about this work in the 2025 edition of the CODEX magazine   Standard for Fresh Dates: Trade Enablement for Climate-Stressed Regions The new standard comes after a decade of negotiations and is deeply important for date-producing regions across the Middle East and North Africa. How will harmonized quality parameters—size, colour, uniformity, defects—reshape global trade? Can such standards help climate-stressed producers secure better prices in high-value retail markets ? By adopting the new Standard for fresh dates, Codex Members now have an international reference that provides the baseline for international trade of this commodity upon which trading partners can agree on additional quality provisions based on their consumers’ preferences. For producing countries, this opens up trade possibilities across the globe, which, in many cases, will support the livelihoods of small producers, bolster economies and provide a safe, good quality product for consumers worldwide. Castilla Lulo (Naranjilla): Regional Standards as a Strategic Tool This new regional standard reflects the fruit’s cultural importance and emerging trade value in Latin America. What criteria does Codex use to decide when a product merits a regional rather than global standard? And do regional standards serve as testbeds for potential future global adoption? When considering new work proposed by FAO/WHO regional coordinating committees, CAC considers, amongst other things, whether the new work is justified on the grounds that the product in question is significantly traded intraregionally and that there is no significant trade between or within other regions When a commodity for which there is a regional standard, sees increased trade at a global level, the coordinating committee concerned, or a Member, can propose extension of the territorial application of the standard. This involves new work, which has to be approved by CAC. CAC48 approved, for example, new work on converting the Regional standard for laver products (Asia) to a worldwide standard, work that will be carried out by the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products (CCFFP). The Next Frontier: Modernizing Codex for a New Era of Food Risks From AI-driven food systems to precision fermentation, novel ingredients, and climate-linked contaminants, food safety risks are evolving faster than many national regulatory systems. What are FAO’s top priorities for modernizing Codex over the next decade? How will future standards incorporate digital traceability, climate risk modelling, and new analytical technologies? FAO is a parent organization of Codex, together with the World Health Organization (WHO). However, work prioritization in Codex is the remit of the Codex Alimentarius Commission. CAC47 adopted the Codex strategic plan 2026–2031 and CAC48 its monitoring framework. The purpose of the Codex strategic plan and its renewal and renegotiation every five years is to ensure that Codex work is aimed at achieving the most appropriate objectives. FAO has a very long-standing tradition to inform the Codex Alimentarius Commission and its subsidiary bodies with all relevant information to facilitate forward looking workplanning. FAO continues to offer its support to all its members and the members of the Codex Alimentarius Commission to assist in national capacity building activities to strengthen food control systems, food safety governance and all related aspects. The new strategic plan has as its first Strategic Goal to: Respond to Members’ needs for protecting the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in the food trade in an evolving global landscape, by developing science-based standards and related texts 1.1 Foresight and horizon-scanning activities are used to support the identification of issues likely to impact food safety, quality and trade. 1.2 Scientific advice that addresses the needs identified by CAC and its subsidiary bodies is primarily provided by FAO and WHO and their joint scientific advisory bodies, informed by globally representative data and appropriate international expertise and methodology. 1.3 Scientific advice is used by CAC and subsidiary bodies in line with Codex risk analysis principles. 1.4 Codex standards and related texts are developed, reviewed and adopted in a timely, transparent and inclusive manner. Thus, with reference to FAO’s foresight programme ( https://www.fao.org/food-safety/scientific-advice/foresight/en/ ), Codex will aim to keep ahead of emerging trends Codex work is already addressing some of the key emerging issues and adapting based on Members’ priorities: Digital traceability is already a key topic of discussion in the Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems (CCFICS), and work is ongoing to develop texts for the digitalization of national food control systems. CAC47 adopted the Codex Committee on Food Labelling’s (CCFL’s) Guidelines on the provision of food information for pre-packaged foods to be offered via e-commerce New food sources and production systems have been discussed extensively in Codex in recent years. In this context several areas of new work are under discussion which will help define how codex addresses this emerging area moving forward. Changing climate is also impacting food safety and this is also impacting the standard setting work of Codex. For example, the Codex Committee on Contaminants in Food (CCCF) elaborated and CAC47 adopted the Code of practice for the prevention or reduction of ciguatera poisoning, in response to the evolving nature of this issue, which is related to climate factors. The Codex Committee on Food Hygiene developed and CAC46 adopted Guidelines for the safe use and reuse of water in food production and processing in response to Members concerns about the need to ensure that in the context of water resource challenges, the safety of food was not negatively impacted. There is a continued emphasis, particularly within CCCF, on the issue of mycotoxins, the threat of which is evolving and possibly expanding as climate factors change. —---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3504/union-budget-2026-expectations.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3504/union-budget-2026-expectations.html Wed, 07 Jan 2026 13:40:55 +0530 Resilience, efficiency & prosperity As Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman unveils Budget 2026, the nation demands more than routine allocations. Indian agriculture is at a historic inflection point. This Budget is expected to operationalise the Viksit Bharat 2047 vision, aiming to transform farming from a low-margin, input-heavy, staple-focused sector into a high-productivity, high-value, globally competitive engine. Economists, industry leaders, and multilateral agencies concur: Incremental tweaks have run out of runway, and structural reforms are imperative to bridge productivity gaps, restore soil and water health, and secure farmers’ livelihoods. “Budget 2026 must signal a decisive move from blanket input subsidies to outcome-linked support that rewards water-use efficiency, balanced fertilisation, and low-emission practices at the farm level,” asserts Prof. Ramesh Chand, Member (Agriculture), NITI Aayog.  Dr Ashok Gulati, Infosys Chair Professor for Agriculture at the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER)and former Chairman, Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP), echoes the call for digitally verifiable, efficiency-led support: “Linking direct benefit transfers with soil health cards, precision nutrient management, and diversified cropping will reduce fiscal stress while lifting total factor productivity across both rainfed and irrigated systems.” The imperative is clear: Budget 2026 must transition from fragmented schemes to a coherent, science-led, productivity-centric agricultural strategy — a structural foundation for a globally competitive, climate-smart, and high-income Indian agriculture. The Foundation of 2025: From Intent to Implementation Budget 2025 laid important groundwork, signaling a shift from stop-gap support toward structural measures aimed at productivity and resilience. The launch of the Prime Minister Dhan-Dhaanya Krishi Yojana, targeting 100 low-productivity districts, marked the start of district-level agricultural renewal. Coupled with a six-year protein security initiative under the Mission for Aatmanirbharta in Pulses, it created stable procurement for tur, urad, and masoor, reducing India’s import dependence in key pulses. “Budget 2026 must accelerate India’s shift to a climate-resilient, value-enhanced agri-economy by scaling biologicals and unlocking the waste-to-wealth opportunity. Targeted fiscal support for biosolutions, soil health and circularity can boost productivity while reducing chemical dependence. ’’ — Krishna Mohan Puvvada, Regional President, (Middle East, India and Africa), Novonesis Experts argue the next step must embed climate intelligence into farm-level decisions. “Budget 2026 must fund monsoon-contingent nutrition advisories at scale — using rainfall analytics and soil data to dynamically adjust fertiliser recommendations — so farmers can shift from fixed schedules to climate-responsive feeding of crops,” says Dr Manish Singh, AVP–Technical & Marketing, Transworld Furtichem Limited. He proposes a unified Nutrient Efficiency Index (NEI), integrating soil-test data, cropping patterns, water use efficiency, and fertiliser balance. “Budgets and subsidies should be allocated based on NEI improvement, not fertiliser consumption. This drives balanced nutrition and scientific fertiliser use rather than volume-driven demand,” he added. “Budget 2026 must signal a decisive move from blanket input subsidies to outcome-linked support that rewards water use efficiency, balanced fertilisation and low-emission practices at the farm level.”​ — Dr Ramesh Chand, Member (Agriculture), NITI Aayog Budget 2026 also sought to ease liquidity bottlenecks by raising Kisan Credit Card limits from Rs 3 lakh to Rs 5 lakh, supporting smallholders, dairy farmers, fishers, and allied producers. Sectoral reforms — from the National Mission on High-Yielding Seeds and a five-year cotton revitalisation plan to institutions like Bihar’s Makhana Board — aimed to modernise production, while allocations for storage, logistics, and market infrastructure addressed post-harvest losses. “Budget 2026 must prioritise digital infrastructure, credit linkages, and rural capacity building to scale precision agriculture. Agri-drones, IoT and data analytics can boost yields, conserve resources and strengthen climate resilience. Targeted subsidies, public–private partnerships and R&D incentives will accelerate adoption, integrate technology with national agricultural databases, and shift India from subsidy dependence to self-reliant, innovation-led farming.”  – Agnishwar Jayaprakash, Founder and CEO of Garuda Aerospace Yet, experts insist these gains must now converge into a coherent resilience architecture. “The next Budget should consolidate irrigation, watershed, soil health, and climate missions into a single ‘National Resilient Farms Mission’ with district-level targets for water productivity and soil organic carbon,” says Dr V. K. Singh, Director, ICAR–Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture (CRIDA).  “Linking direct benefit transfers with soil health cards, precision nutrient management and diversified cropping will reduce fiscal stress while lifting total factor productivity across rainfed and irrigated systems.”​ — Dr. Ashok Gulati, Infosys Chair Professor for Agriculture at the Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) and former Chairman, Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) Dr Himanshu Pathak, Director General of the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), adds, “Every rupee for irrigation must be co-anchored with micro-irrigation, fertigation-ready soils, and climate-resilient varieties so public investment translates into real resilience on farmers’ fields.” Budget 2026 will ultimately be judged on whether it can convert these incremental foundations into a mission-driven, 2047-ready agricultural architecture that delivers genuine resilience, competitiveness, and prosperity for India’s farmers. Fixing the Foundations: The Budget That Must Rewire Subsidies, Markets and Science As Budget 2026 approaches, it is evident that Indian agriculture stands at a pivotal crossroads. The long-standing promise of doubling farmers’ incomes, once a political mantra, now demands a sober re-examination. Structural pressures—from climate volatility and shrinking margins to global competitiveness and rising nutritional expectations—have made incrementalism insufficient.  “The allocation of the budget should be done across three horizons: the immediate year, the next five years, and the long-term vision through 2047,” asserts Sandeepa Kanitkar, Chairman of BASAI and Managing Director of Kan Biosys, highlighting that India’s agricultural budget—barely 2 per cent of total expenditure—is glaringly inadequate for a sector that contributes 17 per cent of GDP, sustains 55 per cent of the population, and underpins the nutrition of 140 crore citizens. “The next Budget should consolidate irrigation, watershed, soil health and climate missions into a single ‘National Resilient Farms Mission’ with clear district targets for water productivity and soil organic carbon.”​ — Dr V. K. Singh, Director, ICAR–CRIDA The inefficiencies of current spending are stark when viewed through the prism of subsidies. India invests roughly Rs 1.75 – 2 lakh crore annually on fertilisers, electricity, MSP procurement, crop insurance, and other input-linked supports, yet the returns in productivity, soil health, water security, and farmer incomes remain worryingly low.  “Subsidies have historically encouraged consumption rather than efficiency,” Sandeepa notes. Cheap urea drives over-application, subsidised electricity has accelerated groundwater depletion, irrigation grants rarely incentivise precision water use, and MSP procurement entrenches cropping patterns that undermine soil regeneration. For sectoral leaders, Budget 2026 must mark a decisive philosophical pivot—from input-heavy, subsidy-driven policies to a science-led, technology-driven, and outcome-oriented framework.  Every rupee for irrigation must be co-anchored with micro-irrigation, fertigation-ready soils and climate-resilient varieties so that public investment translates into real resilience on farmers’ fields.”​ — Dr Himanshu Pathak, Ex- Director General, ICAR & Secretary, DARE S. Soundararadjane, CEO of HyFarm, points to the potato sector as a model: “India could build the world’s most advanced, predictable, and globally competitive potato ecosystem through a National Potato Innovation Mission. CRISPR-edited varieties, AI-powered breeding, drone-led phenotyping, and mass deployment of True Potato Seeds can transform production while reducing costs and disease risks. Region-specific varieties are not optional anymore—they are strategic imperatives.” “Budget 2026 must reform subsidies by shifting from consumption-based support to science-led, Package of Practice–linked incentives tied to production outcomes. Performance-based support will improve soil health, enhance resource efficiency, and raise farmer incomes. Mechanisation assistance should be delivered via DBT and limited to FMTTI/BIS-approved equipment to ensure quality, effectiveness, and measurable impact on the ground.”  - Ravindra Agrawal, Chairman, KisanKraft Ltd Sandeepa further advocates restructuring through Direct Benefit Transfers (DBT). “Subsidies must be given through DBT to farmers and allow them to use this money as per their wish. This has started with Kisan Samman Nidhi but must be extrapolated by diverting subsidies given for insurance, fertilisers, electricity, and water to DBT,” she explains. Such a shift would correct long-standing distortions, empower decision-making, sharply reduce leakages, and create the fiscal headroom necessary to invest in science, innovation, and climate resilience. “To truly raise farm incomes, storage, grading, logistics and digital marketplaces must be treated as core agricultural infrastructure, not peripheral add-ons.”​ — Sanjiv Puri, Managing Director, ITC Ltd “A key priority must be efficiency-driven subsidy reform. We need to shift from consumption-based subsidies to scientifically designed, Package of Practice (PoP)–linked incentives tied directly to production outcomes. Performance-based support improves soil health, enhances resource efficiency, and strengthens farmer incomes. Mechanisation support should be delivered through DBT and restricted strictly to FMTTI/BIS-approved equipment to ensure quality and impact in the field,” says Ravindra Agrawal, Chairman, KisanKraft Ltd, emphasizing that combining DBT with outcome-linked incentives can amplify impact across mechanisation, inputs, and farm management practices. “India’s next big leap will come from shifting towards processed, residue-compliant, traceable and climate-smart agri-exports rather than relying mainly on bulk commodity shipments.”​ — Abhishek Dev, Chairman, APEDA Markets, too, are evolving in ways that demand more sophisticated production systems. The rising domestic and global appetite for residue-free food is already accelerating India’s biopesticide segment. Sandeepa emphasises that a formal residue-free label—jointly administered by the Ministries of Health and Agriculture—could unlock higher farmer incomes through premium market categories. “Blanket reduction on CIB-registered biopesticides must be done at the earliest to 5 per cent,” she cautions, noting that inconsistent GST categorisation is harming both growers and industry participants seeking safer input adoption. “Targeted support for FPOs, agri-startups and interoperable e-market platforms can cut post-harvest losses, stabilise prices and make climate risk more manageable for smallholders.”​ — Dr. Ashok Dalwai, Chairman, Board of Governors of the Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC); Chairman, Karnataka Agriculture The export ecosystem is entering a decisive phase. “India must position itself as a trusted global supplier,” says Kuchibhotla Srinivas, Partner, Deloitte. Strategic export corridors, residue-free clusters, bilateral agreements, and harmonisation with global standards, he argues, can convert India’s scale into global influence.  “If India wants to lead in exports, supply chains must embed traceability, quality assurance, and sustainable input use,” adds Ankur Aggarwal, Executive Chairman, Crystal Crop Protection. The global opportunity is clear. “India’s next big leap will come from shifting towards processed, residue-compliant, traceable, and climate-smart agri-exports rather than relying mainly on bulk commodity shipments,” says Abhishek Dev, Chairman of Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA). “The agri sector needs a unified national framework, science-based standards, and simplified licensing to enable innovation in high-value micronutrients and specialty fertilisers. Streamlined regulation will accelerate advanced nutrition technologies, strengthen soil health, and unlock productivity and profitability gains essential for truly transformative agricultural reform.”  — Dr. Rahul Mirchandani, President, IMMA  Value addition must become central to India’s strategy, particularly in crops like sugarcane. “Exports of sugar quota have to be restricted to further increase production of alcohol for oil substitution. Value addition is the key. Targets of 20 per cent plus substitution have to be the new target for easing some oil dollars. The money thus freed up can be used to improve irrigation, research, and perfecting models which are customised for Indian agriculture,” adds Sandeepa. Circularity, too, must become integral. Krishna Mohan Puvvada, Regional President, (Middle East, India and Africa), Novonesis stresses, “Adequate support must be provided for harnessing the waste-to-wealth potential in agriculture, including robust logistics for storage and transportation of agricultural waste feedstocks that can be transformed into fertilizers and bioenergy.” “A direct benefit transfer model for fertilisers—sold at full cost with farmers claiming subsidy via POS authentication—can be a game-changer. It ensures manufacturers receive full value, the government gains full GST, markets maintain adequate supply, leakages and black-marketing are curbed, and subsidy outlay reflects actual use. Budget 2026 should prioritise this transparent, efficient reform.” – Vinod Goyal, CEO, Agricare Corporation Domestic market architecture requires equal attention. Dr Ashok Dalwai, Chairman, Board of Governors of the Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC) and Chairman, Karnataka Agriculture Price Commission, notes, “Targeted support for FPOs, agri-startups, and interoperable e-market platforms can cut post-harvest losses, stabilise prices, and make climate risk more manageable for smallholders.” Institutional strengthening, he stresses, is vital for farmers to remain competitive amid market volatility. Budget 2026, therefore, must reimagine subsidies, shifting from input-centric to outcome-centric frameworks. “Water, soil and climate must be planned as one ecosystem. Budget 2026 should institutionalise watershed-scale irrigation planning, incentivise soil regeneration, and embed climate-risk analytics into district planning. This is not sustainability for compliance; it is sustainability for survival,” says Srinivas.  “Budget 2026 can back a flagship ‘Sulphur- and Potash-Secure India’ initiative that promotes sulphate-based potash and balanced secondary nutrients, improving taste, colour, shelf-life and exportability of fruits, vegetables and plantation crops while reducing import vulnerability.”--Dr. Manish Singh, AVP-Technical & Marketing, Transworld Furtichem Limited “For a water-starved nation like India, drip should be made compulsory. This would conserve soils along with improving the area of irrigation. The river-joining project must have allocation for short, medium, and long term. Bonds must be raised to mobilise domestic and World Bank funds,” adds Sandeepa. Structural gaps in specialised inputs also demand urgent attention. Dr Rahul Mirchandani, President, Indian Micro-Fertilizers Manufacturers Association (IMMA) observes, “India’s agricultural ecosystem is at an inflection point, yet not structurally prepared for large-scale reforms. One major gap lies in the micronutrients and specialty fertilizer industry, which remains outside mainstream policy despite its direct link to soil health, crop quality, and farmer income. Fragmented licensing under FCO, uneven state compliance frameworks, and the absence of a unified national policy slow innovation, restrict ease of doing business, and prevent rapid scale-up of advanced nutrition technologies like chelates, water-soluble fertilizers, and fortified micronutrient blends.”  “Budget 2026 must anchor a long-term Viksit Bharat Kheti Vision 2047 by reforming fertiliser use. Mandating a 25:15:5 co-pack of chemical, organic and biofertilisers—and supporting OF/BF manufacturing through PLI—can strengthen soil health, raise nutrient-use efficiency, expand acreage coverage and build climate-resilient productivity. It is time subsidies drive transformation, not perpetuate inefficiency ” --- Sandeepa Kanitkar, Chairman of BASAI and Managing Director of Kan Biosys Dr Singh underscores the strategic imperative: “Budget 2026 can back a flagship ‘Sulphur- and Potash-Secure India’ initiative that promotes sulphate-based potash and balanced secondary nutrients, improving taste, colour, shelf-life, and exportability of fruits, vegetables, and plantation crops while reducing import vulnerability.” Complementing this, Vinod Goyal, CEO, Agricare Corporation advocates a pragmatic DBT-based reform: “Fertilizers shall be sold on full cost price at dealer shops—farmers register purchases on a Point of Sale (POS) machine at the time of pick-up, and subsidies are directly transferred to their bank accounts.”  “Budget 2026 must treat water, soil and climate as one ecosystem by institutionalizing watershed-scale irrigation, incentivising soil regeneration and embedding climate-risk analytics in district planning. Equally critical is a legally robust Digital Land Ledger, interoperable with crop and credit data, to unlock formal finance, insurance and market access for millions of farmers still excluded from the system ” — Kuchibhotla Srinivas, Partner, Deloitte Sandeepa adds, “Chemical fertilizers should be bundled with organic and biofertilisers—25 kg of CF, 15 kg of OF, and 5 kg of BF per bag. This allows fertilizer to cover 30 per cent more land with improved use efficiency. Organic and biofertilizer industries can be supported through PLI schemes to attract private investment, improve soils, and build climate resilience.” As multiple industry leaders emphasise, this reform will determine whether Indian agriculture can truly align with the aspirations of Viksit Bharat 2047, delivering prosperity, sustainability, and global competitiveness for generations to come. Tech, Traceability, and Transformation: Budget 2026’s Agri-Vision Budget 2026 is not merely a fiscal exercise—it represents a strategic inflection point for Indian agriculture, an opportunity to pivot from incremental measures to transformative, technology-driven reforms.  “Agri-drones are no longer a novelty; they are an important part of the agritech landscape. Subsidies, public-private partnership models, and targeted R&D incentives can accelerate manufacturing and deployment, creating rural employment while increasing productivity. We must also potentially look at integrating drone data with national agricultural databases to enable smarter crop planning, soil monitoring, and weather resilience strategies,” says Agnishwar Jayaprakash, Founder and CEO of Garuda Aerospace. “ Fertiliser purchases must be linked to a unified Digital Farm ID, which allows tracking of nutrient use efficiency, preventing over-application and enabling customised advisory. It builds India’s first data-driven nutrient intelligence system’’ --- Yogesh Chandra, VP-Sales & Marketing, Transworld Furtichem Limited Echoing this vision, Soundararadjane, stresses that Budget 2026 should introduce a Digital Farming Acceleration Subsidy—shifting support from traditional inputs to IoT and automation tools such as soil moisture sensors, disease-warning IoT nodes, digital soil intelligence kits, smart irrigation systems, automated grading and sorting units, and low-cost climate stations for cold stores. “A 40–60 per cent capital subsidy will democratise access and unlock predictive, precision farming at scale,” he asserts. Equally critical is the foundation of clear land rights and reliable credit. “When a farmer has clear land ownership and predictable finance, they can finally shift from reactive decisions to planned, technology-led farming,” observes Ankur.  “Budget 2026 must accelerate digital land records and frictionless credit so farmers can plan, invest and adopt modern crop protection responsibly. To compete in global markets, India’s supply chains need embedded traceability, quality assurance and sustainable input use. Strategic public–private collaboration can fast-track safe pesticide practices, surveillance systems and next-generation, environmentally responsible formulations ” — Ankur Aggarwal, Executive Chairman, Crystal Crop Protection Srinivas adds, “The Budget should focus on the two biggest unlocks for farmer prosperity: clean digital land records and frictionless credit. A legally robust Digital Land Ledger, interoperable with crop data and credit scoring, can unlock formal finance, insurance, and market contracts for millions of farmers currently outside the system.” The systemic importance of logistics and digital marketplaces is reinforced by Sanjiv Puri, Managing Director, ITC Ltd: “To truly raise farm incomes, storage, grading, logistics, and digital marketplaces must be treated as core agricultural infrastructure, not peripheral add-ons.”  “Budget 2026 should launch a National Potato Innovation Mission to transform India into a globally competitive processing potato hub. A strong public–private R&D partnership must fast-track CRISPR-based climate-resilient varieties, AI-driven breeding, drone phenotyping, automated trials and True Potato Seeds. This science-led upgrade is essential for predictable supply, higher productivity and world-class processing quality.” – S. Soundararadjane, CEO of HyFarm Nutrient management, too, must be integrated. Yogesh Chandra, VP-Sales & Marketing, Transworld Furtichem Limited, explains, “Fertiliser purchases must be linked to a unified Digital Farm ID, allowing tracking of nutrient use efficiency, preventing over-application and enabling customised advisory. It builds India’s first data-driven nutrient intelligence system.” Budget 2026 must therefore deliver measurable, integrated reforms—embedding science, finance, technology, and policy into a unified, farmer-centric framework. It is the launchpad for the Viksit Bharat Kheti Vision 2047, enabling high-productivity, high-value, climate-smart agriculture and positioning India as a globally competitive agri-economy. ----- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3503/higher-regulatory-standards-raise-bar-for-new-antibiotics-but-create-opportunity-for-low-risk-biodegradable-alternatives.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3503/higher-regulatory-standards-raise-bar-for-new-antibiotics-but-create-opportunity-for-low-risk-biodegradable-alternatives.html Tue, 06 Jan 2026 11:44:23 +0530 In this exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Prof. Paula Hammond, Institute Professor and Executive Vice Provost at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Principal Investigator at SMART AMR; Prof. Mary Chan, NTU Singapore’s School of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, and the Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine and Principal Investigator at SMART AMR discuss their groundbreaking antimicrobial polymer platform poised to rewrite the rules of dairy health management. Addressing Bovine Mastitis—a $22 billion global challenge—they explain how Oligoimidazolium carbon acids (OIMs) and Polyimidazoliums (PIMs) deliver potent, low-dose, biodegradable protection without contaminating milk or driving antibiotic resistance. Their early farm trials in China, Malaysia, and Singapore exposed a startling technological stagnation in udder hygiene, revealing an urgent need for modern, eco-safe disinfectant solutions. With regulatory pathways complex and market systems fragmented, they outline a hybrid commercial model balancing direct product development with strategic global partnerships for scale. Their message is clear: antimicrobial innovation must now serve One Health—protecting animals, consumers, and the environment in equal measure. Edited excerpts: The Breakthrough and Its Global Context A $22 Billion Problem: Professor Hammond, bovine mastitis is one of the costliest animal health challenges worldwide. What led your team to focus on this long-standing issue, and what scientific insight unlocked the possibility of developing oligoimidazolium carbon acids (OIMs) as a safer antimicrobial alternative? Prof Mary Chan (my close colleague and collaborator at NTU Singapore) and I have always shared a strong interest in the generation of new polymeric materials for health applications, and we have been particularly interested in charged polymers. Through a collaboration launched by a visiting student from the Chan lab, the imidazolium set of polymers was generated and advanced. Prof Mary’s lab continued to develop more active antibiotic versions and discovered a unique mechanism in this family of materials that makes them highly effective for treatment and prevention of infection. As our research team at SMART began to work toward applying these systems for human health applications, leveraging methods developed in my lab, we saw the potential for these compounds to have an immediate impact on agricultural health. An early SMART researcher working within our shared team first began investigating the potential of the system in a small farm trial and, from that point, we have been pursuing ways in which these novel oligoimidazoliums (OIMs) can be used for safe agricultural applications. Beyond Resistance: Antibiotic resistance has often been framed as a human health crisis, but its agricultural dimension is equally alarming. How does your research reposition the conversation—bridging human, animal, and environmental health under the One Health paradigm? We developed a new class of cationic antimicrobial polymers based on carbene chemistry, so that these cationic polymers are a new class by themselves that are potent and effective in a complex environment and yet biodegradable – able to be degraded into smaller fragments. Our compounds are a class of main chain polyimidazoliums (PIMs)/OIMs. By designing compounds that are effective at low doses, biodegradable, and leave negligible residues in milk, we directly address resistance, agricultural food safety concerns and ecological contamination in one stroke. In practice, that means fewer antibiotics entering the food chain, fewer selective pressures for resistance in farm settings, and reduced downstream environmental impact. Science to Scale: From Lab Discovery to Dairy Field Farm Trial Insights: The initial field trials in Malaysia and Singapore showed encouraging results—no udder irritation, no milk contamination, and strong bacterial suppression. What were the most surprising learnings from translating this molecular innovation to real-world dairy operations? Our initial farm trial was completed in China, and our ongoing farm trial is in Malaysia and Singapore. One of the most striking learnings was how little the technology in modern dairy farming has evolved for udder hygiene, especially in regard to the gap between antibiotics and disinfectants. Despite advances in overall farming practices, there aren’t disinfectants that are both safe and quick acting. The teat dips used today, which typically consist of iodine or chlorhexidine, are essentially the same as several decades ago. This revealed a critical gap between the growing sustainability requirements in modern agriculture and the outdated tools currently available, underscoring the urgent need for innovations like degradable PIMs that are effective, safe and environmentally friendly. Scaling Innovation: You mentioned industry interest from Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, and New Zealand. What does it take to move from promising lab results to full-scale commercialisation in the heavily regulated animal health industry? Commercialisation requires a coordinated program: scaled Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) systems, larger and geographically diverse field trials, robust safety testing, regulatory dossiers for each target market, and credible industry partnerships for distribution and farmer education. Because animal health regulation is regionally fragmented, a pragmatic pathway is to pair focused pilot commercialisation in receptive markets with licensing or joint ventures for wider rollout. The Business of Biotech and Antimicrobial Innovation Commercialisation Pathway: The research is now transitioning to a spin-off company. What is the envisioned business model—direct product commercialisation, licensing to agribusiness majors, or joint ventures with dairy cooperatives? We envision a flexible, hybrid model. Initially, the spin-off will drive product development and secure key regulatory approvals and pilot customers. For broad, rapid deployment, we expect to pursue strategic partnerships with established agribusiness and animal health companies that already have market reach and customer relationships. Joint development agreements with regional partners will also help customise formulations and application protocols for different farming systems. Policy Catalysts: What regulatory or policy shifts—whether in the U.S., EU, or Asia—would most accelerate the adoption of antibiotic alternatives like OIMs in mainstream agriculture? Concrete regulatory actions are already reshaping antibiotic use in agriculture: the European Union (EU) prohibited the preventive use of antibiotics in groups of animals and tightened veterinary oversight under Regulation EU 2019/6. In China, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs banned the use of most antibiotic growth promoters in animal feed in 2020. Specifically in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) phased out growth-promotion uses via Guidance for Industry (GFI) #213; at the same time, GFI #152 requires rigorous microbiological risk assessment for any new antimicrobial in food animals. These higher regulatory standards raise the bar for new antibiotics but create an opportunity for low-risk, biodegradable alternatives like OIMs that do not select for human-relevant resistance. Science, Systems, and Sustainability Rethinking Animal Health: In many ways, bovine mastitis is a microcosm of global food system fragility—overreliance on antibiotics, environmental pollution, and supply chain waste. How can cross-disciplinary R&D, such as SMART AMR’s approach, reshape the future of veterinary science? When scientists, engineers and other experts work together, we get a better understanding of the challenges that we face and the tools that we have available to apply to them, and it is possible to see new ways of addressing decades-old problems. By keeping sustainability and safety as part of the solution requirement, we can evolve our science towards a more holistic approach in which the short and long-term outcomes are considered. Sustainable solutions can be further advanced by bringing scientists together with agricultural and veterinary experts and policy makers to better understand where and how to best focus our cross-disciplinary efforts. The Decade Ahead: As an MIT Institute Professor and a leader in translational science, how do you see the next decade of antimicrobial R&D evolving—especially in balancing synthetic chemistry, bioengineering, and planetary health imperatives? There will be great opportunities in the coming decade to move away from more traditional antimicrobial drugs and towards innovative approaches that address microbes across a multi-spectrum fashion while reducing harm to animal health and the planet. To accomplish this goal, we will need to deploy creative materials chemistry with a deep understanding of biology and ecological considerations. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3502/building-climate-resilience-from-seed-to-shelf-why-agrobiodiversity-is-becoming-strategic-imperative.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3502/building-climate-resilience-from-seed-to-shelf-why-agrobiodiversity-is-becoming-strategic-imperative.html Mon, 05 Jan 2026 13:01:51 +0530 Insights from the AgroSpectrum–GFAiR dialogue reveal how dryland crops, participatory breeding, and value-chain integration can transform biodiversity from a conservation ideal into a scalable strategy for climate-resilient, nutrition-secure food systems At a time when climate volatility, water stress, nutritional insecurity, and biodiversity loss are converging into a systemic food crisis, agrobiodiversity is no longer a peripheral concern—it is rapidly becoming a strategic imperative. This was the central message that emerged from “Mainstreaming Agrobiodiversity in Global Value Chains,” an AgroSpectrum webinar organised in partnership with GFAiR – The Global Forum on Agricultural Research and Innovation, bringing together leading voices from international research, plant breeding, policy, and state-level implementation. The webinar moved deliberately beyond conservation rhetoric to examine how biodiversity can be operationalised across seed systems, breeding pipelines, food processing, and markets. By anchoring global scientific insights alongside grounded implementation experiences, the discussion reframed agrobiodiversity not as a nostalgic return to the past, but as a forward-looking economic and resilience strategy for climate-constrained food systems. Dryland Crops: Not Underutilised, but Underinvested Setting the global analytical frame, Dr Stefania Grando, International Consultant, Agronomist and Plant Breeder, challenged one of the most persistent assumptions in agricultural development—that millets, sorghum, barley, and dryland legumes are marginal crops with limited relevance to modern food systems. Drawing on more than three decades of work across CGIAR systems, she argued that this narrative fundamentally misdiagnoses the problem. The constraint facing dryland crops, she emphasised, is not agronomy or farmer reluctance, but scientific prioritisation—and the investment architecture that flows from it. “Climate change is not a single stress but a moving constellation of uncertainties. While rising temperatures and declining rainfall are globally visible, their local expression is impossible to predict. Breeding, therefore, must target variability itself, not a fixed outcome. Uniform, input-intensive varieties are ill-suited to this reality. Dryland crops, shaped by centuries of stress and uncertainty, already embody the resilience modern breeding systems urgently need—but continue to be systematically underinvested.” --- Dr Stefania Grando, International Consultant, Agronomist and Plant Breeder At a moment when climate change has transformed agriculture into a moving target rather than a predictable system, Dr Stefania Grando noted that breeding for uniformity has become a structural weakness. The global food system remains anchored to a narrow triumvirate—rice, wheat, and maize—optimised for an era of climatic stability and cheap inputs. In contrast, dryland crops evolved under stress, variability, and low external inputs. Yet they receive only a fraction of global research funding and breeding attention. The consequences of this concentration are systemic: accelerated genetic erosion, hollowed-out value chains, rising dependence on water and fertilisers, and the displacement of nutrient-dense traditional diets by calorie-heavy alternatives. In many arid and semi-arid regions, dryland crops now represent the last viable defence against land degradation and desertification. Still, their strategic importance remains largely invisible in mainstream policy and investment decisions. At the centre of this neglect lies a missing link—seed systems. Without functional pathways connecting gene banks, breeders, farmers, processors, and markets, biodiversity remains frozen in collections rather than alive and adaptive in farmers’ fields. Restoring diversity, Dr Stefania Grando argued, requires a decisive shift from conservation to use—building networks of adaptation that make biodiversity economically viable rather than morally symbolic. From Legacy to Leverage: Odisha’s Biodiversity Playbook If Dr Stefania Grando articulated the global diagnosis, Odisha offered a rare example of treatment at scale. Representing the Department of Agriculture and Farmers’ Empowerment, Government of Odisha, Dinesh Balam outlined how the state has deliberately reframed agrobiodiversity from a legacy issue to be preserved into a forward-looking economic and climate resilience strategy. Rather than importing varietal solutions designed elsewhere, Odisha began by taking stock of its own agroecological wealth. Across intervention blocks, the state assembled the full spectrum of available millet diversity—farmer-conserved landraces alongside formally released varieties—and subjected them to participatory varietal trials under real farm conditions. Farmers acted not as technology recipients but as primary evaluators, assessing crops on yield, taste, lodging resistance, pest tolerance, and performance under Odisha’s increasingly erratic rainfall patterns. “Odisha built an institutional bridge between conservation and commerce by redesigning seed systems around farmers. Through ‘crop diversity blocks,’ landraces are evaluated side by side under real farm conditions, selected by farmers, and then purified, multiplied, and scaled through FPO-led seed production. By treating in-situ conservation as a public good and rewarding farmers for it, biodiversity becomes not a legacy to preserve, but a productive, income-generating asset embedded in the state’s agricultural strategy.” --- Dinesh Balam, Representing the Department of Agriculture and Farmers’ Empowerment, Government of Odisha The outcomes were instructive. In over 80 per cent of cases, farmers preferred local landraces to formally released varieties. Subsequent scientific assessments validated these preferences, revealing that at least 14 traditional varieties outperformed university-bred lines on both yield and resilience traits within local micro-agroclimatic conditions. The bottleneck, as Balam noted, was not performance but institutional recognition. To address this, Odisha built a dedicated seed system for landraces—anchored in crop diversity blocks, scientific purification protocols, and decentralised seed production led by farmer producer organisations (FPOs), with technical backstopping from public research institutions. Conservation was treated as a public good, and farmers were rewarded as custodians and innovators. What began with millets is now expanding to pulses, oilseeds, and vegetables through a formal state scheme on neglected crops and forgotten foods, signalling a shift from pilot interventions to systemic policy adoption. Africa’s Perspective: Diversity Exists, Scaling Does Not Bringing a grounded African perspective to the discussion, Dr Juliana Jepkemoi Cheboi, Vice Chairperson, Plant Breeding Association of Kenya (PBAK), argued that the continent’s central challenge has never been a lack of genetic diversity, but the failure to scale innovation without marginalising smallholders. “Africa’s challenge is not a lack of biodiversity but the failure of seed systems to scale it inclusively. In arid regions like Kenya, maize-centric policies have created a mismatch between crops and climate. Landraces and wild relatives of sorghum, millets, and indigenous vegetables already offer heat tolerance, low water demand, and superior nutrition. Reintegrating them into breeding systems—through participatory selection and community seed banks—can turn biodiversity from rhetoric into climate-resilient livelihoods.”  -- Dr Juliana Jepkemoi Cheboi, Vice Chairperson, Plant Breeding Association of Kenya (PBAK) In countries such as Kenya—where more than 80 per cent of land lies in arid and semi-arid zones—the dominance of maize-centric research and policy has created a structural mismatch between crops and climate. Dr Juliana Cheboi highlighted how landraces and wild relatives of sorghum, finger millet, and indigenous vegetables such as amaranth and spider plant already carry the traits required for heat tolerance, low water use, and nutrient density. Yet they remain largely excluded from formal breeding pipelines. Reintegrating these crops, she stressed, requires participatory varietal selection, stronger links between formal seed systems and community gene banks, and deliberate inclusion of women and youth across value chains. Only by aligning farmer demand, breeding priorities, and policy incentives can biodiversity transition from conservation rhetoric to an engine of inclusive, climate-resilient food systems. Rethinking Staples: Biodiversity From Within Challenging the perceived trade-off between staples and diversity, Dr Natalia Palacios Rojas, Principal Scientist, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), reframed the role of maize and wheat in future food systems. As global agriculture confronts the simultaneous transgression of planetary and health boundaries, she argued that staples must deliver nutrition, sustainability, and economic viability—without sacrificing yield or farmer adoption. “ Nutrition cannot be delivered by genetics alone. At CIMMYT, we are reconnecting breeding with farming systems and food culture—learning from models like the milpa, where maize, legumes, and vegetables are grown together to build productivity, soil health, and resilience. Processing innovations such as whole-kernel use, fermentation, nixtamalization, and blended flours allow staples to carry greater nutritional diversity, showing that yield, health, and market acceptance can reinforce—not compete with each other. ” --- Dr Natalia Palacios Rojas, Principal Scientist, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) At CIMMYT, this has translated into embedding nutritional biodiversity directly into maize and wheat through biofortification for zinc, provitamin A, protein quality, and fibre. Participatory breeding now ensures that nutrition-enhanced varieties reflect farmer and consumer preferences, guiding target product profiles that respond to real-world demand rather than laboratory assumptions. Dr Rojas also emphasised that breeding alone is insufficient. By drawing on traditional farming systems such as Latin America’s milpa, and rethinking food processing through whole-grain use, fermentation, nixtamalization, and blended flours combining staples with sorghum, millets, legumes, and indigenous crops, CIMMYT is reconnecting genetics, diets, and culture—while reducing food loss and waste. From Silos to Systems: The Global Policy Lens Placing these field-level experiences within the wider architecture of global research and governance, Joanna Kane-Potaka, Executive Secretary, GFAiR – The Global Forum on Agricultural Research and Innovation, argued that agrobiodiversity remains structurally disadvantaged by fragmented policy frameworks. While biodiversity features prominently in national strategies, most governments continue to operate through siloed mandates—separating nutrition, environment, and commodity support. “Biodiversity will not scale through isolated interventions. It requires whole-of-value-chain alignment—linking seed systems, markets, processing, certification, and consumer demand. Dryland and underutilised crops already deliver a triple dividend for nutrition, the environment, and farmer livelihoods, yet remain locked out by weak incentives. Rebuilding demand from seed to plate, through smarter staples and true co-partnerships, is essential—where farmers are not beneficiaries of innovation, but its co-architects.” --- Joanna Kane-Potaka, Executive Secretary, GFAiR – The Global Forum on Agricultural Research and Innovation For biodiversity-led innovation to scale, Joanna stressed the need for whole-of-value-chain alignment—integrating seed systems, markets, processing, certification, and consumer demand. Dryland crops and underutilised species already embody a triple dividend of nutrition, environmental sustainability, and farmer livelihoods, yet remain excluded due to weak incentives and eroded market infrastructure. Reversing this trajectory, she concluded, requires “smarter staples,” rebuilt demand from seed to plate, and a shift from partnerships to co-partnerships—where farmers are not beneficiaries of innovation, but co-architects of it. From Narrative to Strategy The AgroSpectrum–GFAiR webinar underscored a central truth: Agrobiodiversity does not fail because farmers reject it. It fails when institutions lack the mechanisms to recognise, validate, and reward it. Across geographies—from Odisha to East Africa to global breeding programmes—the science exists, farmer willingness exists, and the climate imperative is unmistakable. What remains is a strategic choice. In a climate-constrained world, resilience will not emerge from uniformity. It will come from diversity—scientifically supported, economically rewarded, and mainstreamed into global value chains. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3501/indian-food-revolution-in-america-street-fine-dining-and-beyond.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3501/indian-food-revolution-in-america-street-fine-dining-and-beyond.html Fri, 02 Jan 2026 15:18:47 +0530 Once boxed into stereotypes, Indian food in the U.S. has exploded into fine dining, street culture, wellness, retail, and tech-driven delivery—just as tariffs and geopolitics put its resilience to the test. Indian cuisine in the United States is in the midst of a once-in-a-generation transformation. Long confined in the American imagination to “curry and naan,” it has broken free of stereotype and scale alike. Today, Indian food stretches confidently across formats—vibrant street food, Michelin-level fine dining, cloud kitchens, wellness beverages, premium snacks, and even spirits—claiming space in food halls, boardrooms, grocery aisles, and cultural conversations. This renaissance has been fueled by powerful forces: demographic growth, rising affluence, technological adoption, and a new American appetite for authenticity and global flavor. Yet just as Indian cuisine has reached critical mass, it faces an unexpected test—not from diners, but from geopolitics. The imposition of steep U.S. tariffs on Indian imports has begun to reshape cost structures, supply chains, and pricing strategies, forcing the ecosystem to prove its resilience. The story of Indian food in America today is therefore not just one of ascent, but of adaptation under pressure. Market Dynamics: Demographics, Affluence and Appetite The numbers tell the story. According to the Pew Research Center, approximately 3.1 million Indians have migrated to—or been born in—the United States since 2000, a staggering 174 per cent increase in just over two decades. This demographic surge is accompanied by significant economic clout: Indian-American households report a median income of $151,000 in 2023, compared with $105,000 for Asian Americans broadly, positioning them as a high-spending, experience-driven consumer segment. The implications for the culinary landscape are profound. Affluent Indian-American households are demanding authentic regional flavors and quality ingredients, encouraging restaurateurs and brands to innovate. Beyond this diaspora, adventurous American consumers—particularly millennials and Gen Z—are increasingly willing to explore global cuisines. Datassential reports that new Indian restaurant openings reached 115 in December 2024, up from just 54 in September 2018. By 2025, 154 upscale Indian dining establishments were operating across the U.S., a sharp increase from 101 in January 2018. The result is a fertile environment in which Indian cuisine can thrive across multiple channels, from street food pop-ups to fine dining experiences and packaged products that land directly in consumers’ kitchens. Fine Dining: Regional Sophistication Meets American Palates Fine dining is emerging as one of the most visible arenas of Indian culinary evolution. Chefs are moving beyond generalized North-South categorizations, highlighting the hyper-regional diversity of India. Patrons may now find Rajasthani ker sangri, Konkani fish curry, Kashmiri nadru yakhni, and even tribal forest-based specialties on menus across New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. Innovation and technology are central to this transformation. Precision cooking techniques, smart tandoors, and AI-enabled menu recommendations allow chefs to cater to gluten-free, plant-based, or low-carb dietary preferences, while AR-enhanced menus and open kitchens create immersive storytelling experiences. These strategies marry authenticity with experimentation, appealing simultaneously to high-income Indian-American diners and cosmopolitan food enthusiasts eager for global culinary adventures. Restaurants like Vikas Khanna’s Bungalow in New York exemplify this trend, reimagining Indian street food through a fine-dining lens. The plating may be modern, but the heart remains traditional: vibrant flavors, textures, and spices that connect diners to India’s culinary soul. This mirrors the evolution of global street foods such as ramen, sushi, and tacos, which transitioned from street stalls to table-service sophistication without losing authenticity. Street Food: Authenticity, Curiosity, and Cultural Impact American diners have become increasingly curious about authenticity. They want food with character, story, and place—not just a generic “Indian buffet.” Street food captures this perfectly: it is vibrant, democratic, and endlessly creative. Dishes like chaat, dosa, and pav bhaji deliver layered textures and complex spice profiles that align seamlessly with the modern palate’s love of contrast and global flavor. Celebrity chef Mariko Amekodommo, renowned for cooking for Hollywood A-listers, explains the trend: "The success of concepts like Chai Pani and Vikas Khanna’s Bungalow shows how Indian street food can evolve into fine dining without losing its soul. The plating may be modern, but the heart remains the same—food that connects people through joy, color, and spice. It’s authenticity redefined as sophistication, much like ramen or tacos once transitioned from street to table." Street food acts as both an entry point for new consumers and a proving ground for regional dishes that often migrate into premium restaurant offerings. It sits at the crossroads of comfort and innovation, giving Americans a new way to experience India that is playful, inclusive, and deeply rooted in tradition. From Queens to San Francisco, these establishments illustrate a clear trend: Indian cuisine is thriving coast-to-coast, balancing regional depth, street-level authenticity, and experiential dining. A Culinary Boom Meets a Trade Shock Just as Indian cuisine has achieved this cultural momentum, external forces have intervened. On July 31, President Donald Trump imposed additional tariffs on Indian exports, which came into effect on August 27—doubling duties on most Indian goods to 50 per cent. While the legality of the tariffs is now being debated , the economic impact has already rippled through New York City’s Indian food ecosystem. Restaurants that had become destinations for Wall Street executives and culinary tourists are now grappling with sharply higher ingredient costs. A 40-pound bag of basmati rice that once cost $30 now wholesales for $45. A 500-gram pack of chili powder has jumped from $7 to $10.50. Coconut milk cases have risen from $38 to $48. Arhar dal has surged from $62 to $82 per bag, while ghee—essential to countless dishes—has climbed more than 46 per cent, from $150 to $220 per case. Margins in restaurants are notoriously thin. For many owners, these increases are not easily passed on to diners without risking demand. Some are cautiously raising prices; others are absorbing costs or redesigning menus. Importers, facing pricing uncertainty, are scaling back shipments. The result is a rare moment where geopolitics directly shapes what ends up on the plate. Digital Adoption: Cloud Kitchens, Ghost Kitchens, and Delivery Technology is amplifying Indian cuisine’s reach. Cloud kitchens, ghost kitchens, and subscription-based tiffin services are delivering authentic flavors at scale. AI-powered ordering, multilingual voice menus, and integrated delivery platforms are meeting the expectations of tech-savvy consumers, while subscription models—offering rotating regional menus or street food specials—expand recurring revenue streams. High-income Indian-American households support premium ingredients, while younger, globally curious consumers explore novel regional flavors. Digital kitchens, ready-to-cook meal kits, and subscription services now bring Indian culinary traditions into American homes, deepening familiarity and loyalty. Indian Snacks and Beverages: Expanding Global Appeal Indian flavors are no longer confined to restaurants—they are rapidly infiltrating U.S. retail and wellness markets, reaching consumers through an increasingly diverse range of snacks, beverages, and functional foods. Traditional beverages, street food-inspired wraps, health-forward confectionery, and even premium spirits are all part of this expanding culinary footprint, signaling that Indian cuisine has become a multi-channel phenomenon. Take Choolaah’s Mango Lassi, for example. This Ohio-based fast-casual chain has leveraged the universal appeal of the Alphonso mango, offering a premium lassi that has quickly become a bestseller. Its success demonstrates that American consumers are not only willing to try Indian beverages but are actively seeking authentic flavors prepared with care and quality ingredients. Similarly, Skippi, originally known for its ice pops, has successfully diversified into savory snacks such as Cream & Onion and Lemon & Mint. By experimenting with Indian-inspired profiles in familiar snack formats, the brand is showing that traditional Indian flavor profiles can move fluidly into American taste preferences without alienating mainstream consumers. Children, too, are becoming part of this cultural exchange. ITC Sunfeast’s Super Egg & Milk Biscuits combine Indian flavors with Western snack formats, offering a product that balances taste, nutrition, and fun. At the same time, ADF Foods Roti Wraps are translating popular street food items like Paneer Biryani and Tandoori Aloo into convenient, on-the-go meals, enabling busy urban consumers to enjoy the vibrancy of Indian street food without leaving home or office. These products highlight a crucial point: accessibility and convenience are just as important as authenticity in driving adoption among new consumer segments. Health and wellness trends further amplify Indian flavors’ U.S. appeal. Confectionery and functional foods are integrating traditional spices and adaptogens into indulgent formats, a prime example being Turmeric Latte Chocolate and Van Houten’s Spiced Chocolate, which combine turmeric, chai, and other Indian spices to appeal to wellness-conscious yet indulgent consumers. Similarly, chai- and saffron-flavored protein bars are creating a niche where exotic flavors meet functional nutrition, appealing to fitness-oriented and health-conscious demographics that value both taste and wellbeing. Even traditional ingredients are finding modern applications. Good Phats Ghee has taken a centuries-old staple and repositioned it as a versatile spread and cooking ingredient suitable for contemporary kitchens, bridging heritage and innovation. Premium spirits, too, are entering this narrative. Paul John Indian Whisky, crafted from six-row barley and distilled in traditional copper pot stills, has positioned India as a rising player in the global whisky market, introducing consumers to both craftsmanship and provenance. Finally, the fusion of global inspiration with Indian soul is exemplified by Juicy Brick, which draws from East Asian juice and snack concepts while infusing Indian spices. Co-founder of Juicy Brick, Grace Bryan emphasizes the brand’s mission: “By blending Indian spices into our juice and snack offerings, we’re creating an entirely new flavor profile that appeals to the adventurous U.S. consumer. It’s East meets West, but with Indian soul.” Juicy Brick’s approach illustrates how Indian flavors are not just being transplanted but creatively reinterpreted to resonate with American tastes while retaining cultural authenticity. Together, these innovations underscore the synergy between restaurants, retail, and wellness products, demonstrating that Indian cuisine’s influence in the U.S. is broad, multi-faceted, and increasingly mainstream. By offering consumers a combination of authenticity, convenience, health, and creativity, these products are reinforcing Indian flavors’ visibility, accessibility, and adoption across American households, establishing a foundation for long-term culinary influence. Health, Sustainability, and Culinary Innovation The modern U.S. Indian dining scene is not only about flavor—it is increasingly defined by conscious choices that align with health, sustainability, and cultural authenticity. Restaurants across the country are embracing eco-friendly practices, from biodegradable packaging and compostable tableware to transparent carbon footprint labeling. By integrating sustainability into their operations, chefs and restaurateurs are responding to a growing segment of American consumers who prioritize environmental responsibility as much as taste. On the culinary side, Indian chefs are creatively reinterpreting traditional ingredients to meet contemporary health and wellness trends. Millets, once staples of Indian rural diets, are finding their way into pilafs, breads, and even desserts, valued for their high fiber content, low glycemic index, and climate-resilient cultivation. Similarly, adaptogens and Ayurvedic herbs such as ashwagandha, turmeric, and holy basil are being incorporated into drinks, snacks, and main courses, delivering functional benefits while retaining cultural authenticity. Gut-friendly foods, fermented ingredients like pickles, dosa batters, and probiotic lassis are also gaining traction, appealing to health-conscious diners interested in digestive wellness. This fusion of tradition and innovation resonates across consumer segments. Affluent Indian-American households appreciate that these culinary practices honor heritage while delivering modern nutritional value, while the broader mainstream audience increasingly seeks meals that are both flavorful and health-forward. By marrying authenticity with wellness and environmental consciousness, Indian cuisine is differentiating itself from other global cuisines, creating a unique competitive advantage in the U.S. market. Beyond nutrition and sustainability, this trend has cultural and experiential dimensions. Diners are engaging not only with taste but with the story behind each dish—the region it comes from, the locally sourced or sustainable ingredients it uses, and the wellness principles it embodies. In this way, health-conscious innovation becomes a vehicle for storytelling, deepening consumer connection and reinforcing the cultural credibility of Indian cuisine. In essence, Indian restaurants and brands in the U.S. are simultaneously safeguarding tradition, embracing innovation, and addressing the values of today’s conscious consumer—a strategy that ensures the cuisine’s relevance, resilience, and long-term appeal. Convergence of Trends: How Indian Cuisine is Taking Over U.S. Tables The rise of Indian cuisine in the United States isn’t just a trend—it’s a full-blown cultural movement, where flavors, technology, and storytelling collide to create a culinary ecosystem that’s impossible to ignore. What’s remarkable is how all the pieces—restaurants, snacks, beverages, and even wellness foods—feed off each other, each channel amplifying the others and bringing Indian flavors into more hands, hearts, and kitchens than ever before. Fine dining and street food, often seen as opposite ends of the spectrum, are actually partners in flavor. Upscale kitchens are exploring hyper-regional dishes with surgical precision—think Rajasthani ker sangri or Kashmiri nadru yakhni—while telling the stories behind every spice and ingredient. Meanwhile, street food is bringing that same authenticity to a wider audience: chaat, pav bhaji, and dosa that pop with texture, spice, and color, delivered in casual pop-ups, fast-casual kitchens, and food halls. Together, these two worlds create a delicious feedback loop: a street-favorite dish can graduate to fine dining stardom, while high-concept plating inspires casual chefs to experiment in playful, accessible ways. Driving this culinary surge is a demographic and economic engine. The Indian-American community has grown rapidly over the past two decades, and their median household incomes are well above the national average. They are demanding authenticity, premium ingredients, and regional nuance. But it’s not just the diaspora who are hungry—millennials and Gen Z are chasing food with story, spice, and personality. They want dishes that surprise the palate, ignite conversation, and transport them halfway across the world in a single bite. Chefs and brands that understand this are winning loyalty and shaping taste buds from coast to coast. Technology is the secret sauce that’s scaling this revolution. Cloud kitchens, ghost kitchens, and subscription meal kits are making it easier than ever to get authentic Indian flavors delivered to your door, while AI-powered ordering platforms allow for personalization—spice level, dietary preferences, or rotating regional menus. Virtual kitchens also provide a playground for experimentation, letting chefs test bold regional dishes or street food mashups before rolling them out at scale. A concept that once lived in one city can now travel digitally, reaching diners across the nation. And it’s not just about restaurants. Indian flavors are moving into every corner of the pantry. Turmeric-laced chocolates, chai-spiced protein bars, on-the-go Roti wraps, and Alphonso mango lassis are becoming household staples. These products make it easy for Americans to bring Indian cuisine into everyday life, creating a cycle where curiosity about restaurants fuels interest in retail, and vice versa. The result? A multi-channel culinary ecosystem where Indian flavors are always on display, always accessible, and always delicious. Sustainability and wellness give this story an extra layer of flavor. Restaurants and brands are integrating millets, Ayurvedic herbs, adaptogens, and gut-friendly foods into creative dishes, snacks, and drinks. Biodegradable packaging, compostable tableware, and ingredient transparency appeal to eco-conscious diners, while health-minded consumers embrace offerings that are both indulgent and functional. Indian cuisine, in other words, has found a way to be both soul-satisfying and value-driven, appealing to anyone who wants to eat thoughtfully without sacrificing taste. The end result is something rare: a dynamic, culturally rich phenomenon. Indian cuisine in America has moved beyond the immigrant corner of the market into a vibrant, multi-channel ecosystem, alive with flavor, story, and experimentation. It thrives where authenticity meets innovation, street meets fine dining, and restaurants meet retail shelves. For American diners hungry for spice, texture, and a story behind every bite, Indian cuisine isn’t just a meal—it’s a journey. And as it continues to evolve, it’s not merely keeping pace; it’s shaping the culinary imagination of a nation and redefining what it means to eat Indian. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3495/asias-new-food-reality-persistent-inflation-hidden-costs-and-dietary-shifts.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3495/asias-new-food-reality-persistent-inflation-hidden-costs-and-dietary-shifts.html Wed, 24 Dec 2025 16:34:56 +0530 Managing the transition - From cheap food to resilient, quality-driven systems For decades, Asia’s economic rise was underpinned by affordable food. Incomes grew, urbanisation accelerated, and households spent a shrinking share of their budgets on staples. However, in 2025, the structural foundations of cheap food began to erode. Across the region, consumers are paying more for food—not just because prices spike temporarily, but because the underlying economics of production, distribution, and risk have shifted. The era when food inflation was a short-lived headline has given way to a new normal where price pressures are persistent, uneven, and politically consequential. Food Price Dynamics: Mixed Signals, Persistent Pressure At the consumer level, food inflation across Asia has become uneven, category-specific, and increasingly driven by domestic transmission mechanisms rather than headline global prices. The era when falling global grain or sugar prices reliably translated into cheaper food for households is fading. What now matters as much as futures markets is how costs move through energy systems, processing chains, cold storage, logistics networks, labour markets, and food service ecosystems. Across Asia, consumer price data compiled by Trading Economics shows that food inflation is resurfacing in pockets even as global commodity indices remain relatively calm — underscoring a widening disconnect between wholesale price signals and what households actually pay at the checkout counter.This divergence reflects a structural shift. Food inflation is no longer primarily a farm-level phenomenon. It is increasingly a systems-level outcome shaped by fuel prices, electricity tariffs, packaging materials, disease management in protein supply, climate-induced volatility in perishables, and rising compliance and labour costs. As a result, price pressures are now most acute in categories that are processed, transported, stored, or prepared — even when raw agricultural output remains ample.Nowhere is this shift clearer than in Singapore, which functions less as an outlier and more as an early-warning system for the rest of the region. With near-total reliance on imports and limited scope for price smoothing through domestic buffers, the city-state absorbs global price movements, currency shifts, and supply chain costs with minimal delay. According to Trading Economics, food prices rose 1.2 percent year-on-year in September 2024 — the fastest pace since April — even as global grain and sugar markets showed little sign of stress.The composition of this inflation matters more than the headline figure. Rice and cereals recorded only modest increases. Fish prices edged up marginally. Fruits and vegetables even slipped into mild deflation. Calories remained broadly affordable. The pressure instead concentrated in oils and fats, sugar and confectionery, beverages, and meat — precisely the categories most exposed to energy inputs, processing intensity, and global edible oil markets. Singapore’s experience illustrates how food inflation in Asia is shifting away from staple scarcity toward the rising cost of modern, protein- and energy-intensive diets.Malaysia reinforces this diagnosis from a different angle. Trading Economics data for September 2025 shows food prices rising 2.1 percent year-on-year, the steepest increase since June, driven primarily by fish and seafood, oils and fats, sugar-related products, and food consumed outside the home. These are not the segments typically associated with harvest failure or weather shocks. They are segments where costs accumulate after the farm gate — through cold chains, transport, processing, and food service operations.At the same time, food prepared at home remained broadly stable. Cereals, meat, fruits, and vegetables recorded price declines, while milk, dairy products, and eggs stabilised after earlier deflation. This divergence highlights a crucial point: Malaysia’s food inflation is not being driven by agricultural scarcity. It is being driven by the economics of conversion — the cost of turning raw food into meals — at a time when household incomes are not rising fast enough to absorb those increases without friction.China, too, fits this broader pattern, though in a way that can easily mislead. Trading Economics figures for October 2025 show food prices still falling year-on-year, but at a slower pace than earlier in the year — the ninth consecutive monthly decline, yet the smallest since July. On the surface, China appears insulated from Asia’s food inflation pressures.The details suggest otherwise. Declines in fresh vegetables, eggs, cooking oils, dairy products, and fruit have all moderated. Pork prices — a politically sensitive bellwether — continue to fall, but at a slower rate, as abundant supply and lower feed costs offset a modest recovery in demand during the Golden Week holidays. These trends indicate that the forces suppressing prices — oversupply, weak consumption, and aggressive inventory management — are gradually losing momentum.China’s food deflation is not evidence of structural abundance. It is the outcome of scale, state intervention, and demand compression. Beneath the surface, processing margins, logistics operators, and food service businesses face the same cost pressures seen elsewhere in Asia. Beijing has so far chosen to absorb or suppress these pressures through policy and inventory control, stabilising consumers in the short term while compressing farm incomes and shifting stress downstream in the value chain.Taken together, these country-level patterns point to a common conclusion. Asia is not experiencing a uniform food inflation shock. It is entering a regime of persistent, uneven pressure — one where prices rise not because crops fail, but because the systems that move, transform, and serve food have become structurally more expensive to operate. In this environment, calm global indices offer reassurance, but not relief. The next phase of food inflation in Asia will be quieter, harder to reverse, and far more politically sensitive than the shocks that came before. Proteins and Vegetable Oils: Upward Pressure Where It Hurts Most If cereals historically anchored food affordability, proteins and edible fats are now the engines of inflation. Even where staple grains and vegetables remain relatively stable, rising prices in animal proteins and vegetable oils are reshaping consumer budgets and dietary patterns across Asia. Global markets have seen historic rallies in meat prices amid tight supplies, shifting consumption patterns, and robust demand recovery in developed regions—trends that transmit rapidly into Asia’s urban food baskets, even when local price indices diverge. Dairy products have also shown upward pressure in 2025. Milk powders, butter, and cheese are more expensive due to constrained production in key exporting countries, rising feed costs, and disease outbreaks that affect herd productivity. Labour, cold chain logistics, and energy costs have also contributed to higher dairy prices, making inflation in this category increasingly persistent.Global Meat Prices: Record Levels and Structural DriversThe current surge in global meat prices to record levels is a complex phenomenon, rooted in a series of interconnected events and persistent market pressures. As of October 2025, the FAO Meat Price Index has not only continued its upward climb but has set new all-time highs, reflecting a substantial year-over-year increase. Beef prices, in particular, have reached levels not seen in over six decades, with producer prices hitting approximately $6.9 per kilogram in September 2025.The primary catalyst for this unprecedented rally is the severe contraction of cattle herds globally. The critical shortage stems from prolonged and widespread droughts that have decimated pasture quality, forcing ranchers to incur higher feed costs or liquidate their herds. Consequently, U.S. slaughter rates have declined significantly, with forecasts predicting a substantial drop in fed cattle slaughter for 2025. Efforts to rebuild herds are hampered by strong feeder cattle prices, which incentivize producers to sell rather than retain heifers for breeding.Beyond the U.S., stringent animal welfare regulations in the European Union and disease outbreaks—such as the New World Screwworm in Mexico—have further constrained global beef supplies. Simultaneously, sheep-meat prices have also been on a consistent upward trend, driven by tight export supplies from Oceania, with a greater volume being directed to high-value markets like the United Kingdom and the United States. Experts anticipate these prices will continue to climb, potentially peaking in 2026. This confluence of supply-side shocks has globalized protein inflation, exerting a disproportionate impact on Asian urban food baskets where imported and high-value meats are a growing dietary component.Asia’s Urban Protein ChallengeIn Asia, the share of animal proteins in the average urban diet continues to grow with rising incomes. Poultry, eggs, and milk are staples for urban households, but production costs are climbing. Feed price volatility—driven by maize and soy price swings—remains the largest driver, accounting for up to 70 per cent of poultry and aquaculture production costs. Labour and disease management add further pressure: avian influenza outbreaks, porcine epidemic cycles, and stricter veterinary compliance regulations inflate the cost base, limiting producers’ ability to absorb shocks. Aquaculture, once Asia’s low-cost protein solution, is also squeezed. Rising feed costs, higher environmental compliance expenses, and climate-induced pond management challenges are forcing producers to pass costs directly to consumers.Vegetable oils constitute another inflationary pinch point. Prices for palm, soy, rapeseed, and sunflower oils have remained elevated in 2025 due to adverse weather events, lower-than-expected yields in major producing regions, and sustained import demand from China and Europe. These oils form the backbone of Southeast Asian cooking, particularly in processed foods, street food preparation, and restaurant kitchens. Even in countries where staple cereals or vegetables remain cheap, higher edible oil prices transmit through household budgets, raising the real cost of typical meals. Rising Costs, Shifting AffordabilityThe combined effect is that the real cost of nutrition has shifted upward. Families may still meet caloric needs with rice, noodles, or vegetables, but the affordability of protein-rich and oil-intensive diets—central to urban eating patterns—is declining. Inflation is now concentrated in categories that matter most to health, nutrition, and social stability, rather than staples alone.This shift also has broader policy and social implications. Governments can stockpile grains or subsidize cereals, but they have far less control over protein markets and edible oil supply chains, which are globally integrated and more sensitive to shocks. As a result, Asia faces a new type of food inflation: one that is less visible in headline cereal prices but more felt in kitchens, restaurants, and across urban diets.In short, the food inflation story in Asia has evolved. Cheap staples can no longer mask the rising cost of proteins and oils. For households, this means diets are becoming more expensive even when staples are stable. For policymakers, it signals that traditional interventions focused on grains will be insufficient: managing inflation now requires attention to proteins, fats, and the energy-intensive infrastructure that delivers them to tables across the region. Input Costs and the Hidden Inflation Engine Consumer food prices reveal only the surface of Asia’s inflation challenge. Beneath the market stall, a deeper set of cost pressures — fertilisers, energy, labour, and climate risk premiums — have become the structural engine driving persistent inflation even when headline commodity markets appear muted.FAO data through 2025 shows this complexity clearly. Global food prices as measured by the FAO Food Price Index have oscillated throughout the year, rising on the back of meat, dairy, sugar and vegetable oils, even as cereal and staple grain prices softened. In June 2025, the FAO Food Price Index edged up 0.5 percent from May, with higher meat, dairy and vegetable oil prices more than offsetting declines in cereals and sugar. The cereal price index fell 1.5 percent that month amid abundant maize supplies from Argentina and Brazil, yet the broader index remained elevated compared with year‑ago levels.Earlier in the year, FAO reporting showed the index climbing in February 2025, propelled by sharper rises in sugar, dairy and vegetable oils. The vegetable oil index in particular was nearly 29 percent higher than the previous year, mirroring global import demand and biodiesel blending incentives, even as rice and cereal values lagged. These diverging sub‑indices highlight a key structural shift: inflation is increasingly driven by energy‑intensive and processing‑linked food categories, not simply staples.Fertiliser markets exemplify the hidden inflation dynamic. Even as global grain prices have softened, fertiliser use and prices remain volatile. Recent FAO analyses point to a rebound in global fertiliser consumption in 2024–25, led by high nitrogen and potash demand, and rising costs due to energy market volatility and supply disruptions. Nitrogen and phosphate prices climbed more than 20 percent in 2025, raising concerns about input affordability and placing pressure on farmers’ cost structures.These input cost pressures are structural. Fertiliser affordability is intimately tied to energy markets — particularly natural gas prices, which serve as a key feedstock for nitrogen production. Even as crude oil prices showed volatility in 2025, geopolitical risks — notably tensions in the Middle East and the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz for urea and LNG transport — heightened the risk premia in energy‑linked farm inputs, according to global market analysts.Energy and labour cost dynamics amplify the squeeze. As rural workers migrate to urban jobs, farms increasingly rely on mechanisation and energy‑intensive irrigation, which are themselves subject to fluctuating fuel and electricity costs. Groundwater depletion in parts of South and Southeast Asia has made irrigation electricity a persistent structural expense that cannot easily be reversed. At the same time, labour shortages raise wages for both farm crews and skilled operators of precision agriculture systems, which further elevates the baseline cost of production.Climate variability in 2025 has embedded itself into pricing mechanisms rather than acting as an episodic shock. Heatwaves across South and Southeast Asia, droughts in key growing regions, and episodic floods have stressed crops and infrastructure repeatedly within a single season, driving up risk premiums embedded in food supply chains. Mitigating climate risk now requires investment in resilient seed varieties, drought‑tolerant crops, adaptive irrigation systems, and insurance — all of which carry additional cost. These layers of expense accumulate and transmit through to food prices over time, long after headline commodity indices suggest stability.Economists increasingly argue that price volatility in agricultural markets can no longer be understood without integrating climate risk models into risk pricing and supply forecasts, marking a departure from earlier decades when weather was treated as an exogenous shock. In this new regime, climate risk is a cost factor — not an occasional spike — baked into the price of food at every level of the value chain.Taken together, the FAO’s 2025 pricing data indicates why food inflation persists even when headline grain prices are soft: the inflationary drivers have shifted from global commodity markets into domestic production systems and supply chains. Fertiliser costs, energy prices, labour constraints, and climate risk — once peripheral factors — are now central to how food costs are transmitted to consumers.This shift has profound policy implications. Governments that stabilise staple prices through buffer stocks or import controls may still find household food inflation stubborn, because the inflationary pulse has moved into inputs and processing that are less amenable to traditional interventions. In this environment, stable global indices offer reassurance — but not relief. The pressure has not disappeared. It has simply moved closer to home, embedded in the cost structures of farms, factories, and kitchens across Asia. Nutrition, Quality, and Structural Demand Shifts Asia’s food landscape is no longer defined solely by caloric sufficiency. Rising incomes, urbanisation, and changing lifestyles are reshaping dietary patterns, shifting demand toward higher-quality, safer, and more diverse foods. Consumers now prioritise freshness, traceability, and nutritional value, creating a structural pull on supply chains that goes beyond conventional price inflation. High-value products—ranging from protein-rich animal foods to fresh fruit, vegetables, and specialty oils—require modern processing, cold chain logistics, and quality assurance frameworks. Compliance with sanitary and phytosanitary regulations, HACCP certification, and traceability systems adds tangible costs, which are reflected in retail prices. For example, FAO reporting from 2025 indicates that vegetable oils and animal proteins—particularly beef, poultry, eggs, and dairy—remained structurally expensive even as cereals and staples saw moderate price declines. These categories are capital- and labour-intensive, sensitive to feed and energy costs, and vulnerable to disease outbreaks, such as African swine fever and avian influenza, which remain relevant risk factors across Southeast Asia. This trend is further reinforced by the expansion of modern retail formats and e-commerce channels. Supermarkets, cold-chain-enabled delivery services, and online grocery platforms require strict temperature control, packaging standards, and automated tracking systems. While these investments reduce spoilage and improve quality, they also increase the cost of the food that reaches consumers’ plates. Even minimally processed foods now carry “hidden costs” tied to compliance, cold storage, and distribution efficiency—costs that are rising faster than wages in many emerging Asian markets. The welfare implications are uneven. Higher-income households can absorb these costs without compromising nutrition, benefiting from improved food safety, variety, and convenience. Conversely, lower-income households often face difficult trade-offs. Rising costs of proteins, oils, and fortified foods force some families to substitute lower-quality staples or reduce animal-protein intake. FAO studies suggest that even modest increases in meat and dairy prices can shift consumption patterns, particularly in urban centres where staples are less elastic in cost-sensitive diets. Policymakers now confront a dual challenge. On one hand, they must maintain affordability for vulnerable populations to prevent nutritional deficits. On the other, they must avoid policies that suppress structural improvements in food quality, safety, and diversity—developments that are critical for long-term public health and economic resilience. For example, price caps or excessive subsidies on meat or fresh produce may temporarily shield consumers, but they risk discouraging investment in modern production and distribution systems, ultimately limiting access to higher-quality foods over the medium term. In effect, Asia’s food inflation story is increasingly about structural demand shifts rather than supply shocks alone. Rising food bills reflect not just traditional inflation, but the costs of transitioning toward diets that are safer, more nutritious, and traceable. The FAO’s 2025 reports underscore that this trend is broad-based: even when cereal prices are stable or declining, inflation persists in proteins, oils, and processed foods precisely because these segments are at the forefront of modernization and quality improvement. In this evolving landscape, understanding food inflation requires a holistic lens: one that considers production costs, logistics, regulatory compliance, dietary preferences, and socio-economic disparities. Simple measures of calorie affordability no longer capture the full picture. Instead, analysts and policymakers must assess how structural quality improvements interact with income distribution and market dynamics to determine who benefits from—and who is squeezed by—Asia’s end of cheap food. What Comes Next: Strategic Imperatives for Asia The era of cheap food is drawing to a close in Asia, but the transition is not a crisis in the conventional sense. It is a structural transformation driven by the convergence of higher-quality diets, climate-linked production costs, tighter input markets, and the increasing complexity of supply chains. The question now is not whether food prices will rise—they already are—but how governments, agribusinesses, and consumers can navigate this landscape strategically, ensuring affordability, resilience, and long-term growth. Redesign Incentive Structures At the heart of a sustainable food economy lies effective price signaling. Subsidies and price controls can provide temporary relief, but indiscriminate interventions risk distorting investment and supply decisions, especially in sectors like fertilizers, energy-intensive inputs, and high-value proteins. Targeted, temporary measures—directed at vulnerable populations or strategic inputs—can stabilize markets without undermining efficiency. Equally important is accelerating efficiency-enhancing investments across the agricultural value chain. Precision agriculture, AI-driven advisory systems, smart irrigation, resilient seeds, and climate-adaptive fertilizers are no longer optional—they are essential. FAO reports from 2025 indicate that even moderate improvements in nutrient-use efficiency and water management can reduce costs for farmers and, over time, moderate consumer price pressures. By linking these technologies to accessible financing, training, and digital advisory platforms, governments and firms can make resilience economically viable for smallholders while maintaining output growth. Rebalance Trade Policy Short-term measures such as export restrictions or import curbs can smooth volatility but risk long-term market inefficiency. Asia’s governments must navigate a delicate trade-off: safeguarding domestic affordability while remaining integrated into global supply chains that provide scale, resilience, and access to essential commodities. Strategic trade frameworks can offer a solution. These frameworks would combine data-driven monitoring, transparent stock management, calibrated tariffs, and regional coordination to anticipate shocks in proteins, oils, and staples. By aligning trade policy with domestic production realities and market intelligence, countries can protect consumers in the short term while preserving incentives for long-term investment and supply diversification. Embed Climate Risk in Markets Climate variability is no longer an “external shock”; it is now a structural cost factor embedded in production, logistics, and processing. Heatwaves, floods, and droughts in 2025 repeatedly stressed supply chains in Southeast and South Asia, amplifying risk premiums and input costs. Markets and policy must internalize this reality. Climate-adjusted pricing, risk-based insurance, and fiscal tools—such as differentiated subsidies or investment incentives for climate-smart technologies—can align producer behavior with resilience objectives. Integrating climate risk into fertilizer pricing, irrigation investments, crop insurance, and procurement frameworks ensures that adaptation and mitigation are economically rational, rather than optional. Protect Nutrition and Equity Food affordability is no longer just about calories; it is about quality, safety, and diversity. Rising demand for proteins, dairy, oils, and fortified foods increases both production complexity and costs. Blanket subsidies for staples risk preserving caloric intake at the expense of diet quality or sustainable production practices. Targeted nutritional support—such as vouchers, fortified foods, school feeding programs, or protein subsidies—can protect vulnerable populations while maintaining incentives for high-quality, safe, and traceable food production. This dual approach ensures that affordability and quality evolve in tandem, rather than forcing consumers to choose between calories and nutrition. Managing the Transition The structural transition to higher-cost, higher-quality, and more resilient food systems requires strategic foresight. Asia’s agricultural and food sectors are adjusting to tighter margins, evolving dietary expectations, complex risk environments, and persistent input pressures. In this environment, the end of cheap food is not a problem to be solved overnight. It is a transition to a more sophisticated, resilient, and quality-driven food system. Those who adapt—governments designing responsive policies, firms investing in innovation, and households adjusting consumption patterns—will benefit from sustainable growth and reduced vulnerability. Those who fail to recognize the shift risk instability, inequity, and persistent inflation pressures. Asia’s challenge—and opportunity—is clear: to manage rising costs while elevating diet quality, building resilient supply chains, and protecting social cohesion. Success will define the next decade of food security and economic growth across the region. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3494/palm-oil-after-esg-is-golden-crop-losing-its-crown.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3494/palm-oil-after-esg-is-golden-crop-losing-its-crown.html Tue, 23 Dec 2025 17:47:00 +0530 A 2025 Asia round-up on regulation, capital and the re-ordering of the world’s most contested commodity For decades, the ascendancy of palm oil within the pantheon of global vegetable oils seemed nothing short of immutable. Its unmatched land efficiency, coupled with unparalleled versatility, rendered it indispensable—fueling industrial food systems, underpinning the edifice of consumer goods, and more recently, energising biofuel markets. Southeast Asia constructed entire developmental paradigms around this verdant monoculture; India and China wove it seamlessly into their consumption matrices. Multinational corporations, with canny acumen, capitalised on the scale, reaping profits that seemed both inexorable and inexhaustible. Yet, as 2025 draws to a close, palm oil’s indispensability remains uncontested, but the modalities of its dominion have metamorphosed. The commodity, erstwhile governed predominantly by the vagaries of land allocation and price discovery, now finds itself under the aegis of regulation, traceability imperatives, capital discipline, and geopolitical choreography. Demand, though robust and structural, is increasingly contingent upon conditional access; compliance costs have proliferated, and supply chains are inextricably entwined with energy policy. Investors have commenced a meticulous repricing of risk, and regulators wield ESG as both cudgel and compass. This is not a narrative of obsolescence; it is, rather, a tale of a power transition—from hectares to governance, from sheer volume to verifiable authenticity, and from unbridled expansion to judicious credibility. From Golden Crop to Strategic Commodity The global ascendancy of palm oil is explicable, in large measure, by its biological efficiency. The oil palm’s oleaginous productivity per hectare dwarfs that of soy, rapeseed, or sunflower, enabling Indonesia and Malaysia to industrialise agronomy while sustaining burgeoning populations. Malaysia’s contribution, often overshadowed by Indonesia’s sheer volumetric supremacy, was seminal. The nation architected the institutional scaffolding of the industry: sophisticated plantation science, advanced refining and oleochemical capacity, futures markets, and stringent quality control systems. By the mid-2010s, Malaysia had pivoted decisively from mere land expansion to enhanced productivity and downstream value creation—a strategic recalibration that would later prove prescient. However, this ascendancy was not without profound environmental and social externalities. Plantation proliferation catalysed deforestation, peatland degradation, and socio-economic dislocations, occasionally precipitating community conflicts. Initially illuminated by NGOs, these challenges were amplified by consumer advocacy and shareholder activism, ultimately codified within regulatory frameworks. By 2025, the appraisal of palm oil transcended metrics of output and cost; it had become a crucible for ESG governance, regulatory fidelity, and geopolitical sagacity. ESG Crosses the Rubicon and Malaysia’s Strategic Advantage The inflection point of the decade materialised when sustainability transcended voluntarism to become a statutory imperative. The European Union’s Regulation on Deforestation-free Products (EUDR), inaugurated in 2023 and deferred in late 2025, profoundly recalibrated palm oil supply chain architecture. Though the deferral mitigated immediacy, the underlying objective remained incontrovertible: to preclude commodities implicated in deforestation from ingress into one of the world’s most consequential consumer markets. Palm oil, alongside selected derivatives—crude oil, kernel oil, and palm-derived chemicals—fell squarely within the regulation’s ambit. For multinational procurers, the implication was unequivocal: opacity was untenable. Commodities must be traceable to their point of origin, verified as legally produced, and demonstrably insulated from deforestation and ecological degradation. Pledges devoid of evidentiary substantiation were, quite simply, insufficient. Malaysia, presciently, seized upon this regulatory milieu, positioning itself as a low-risk, compliant supplier. The nation’s National Traceability System—an integration of the e-Malaysian Sustainable Palm Oil platform, GeoSawit, and the Sawit Intelligent Management System—consolidates certification data, geolocation coordinates, and verified transaction records, enabling EUDR-relevant intelligence to be centrally accessed and disseminated to EU partners. By these measures, Malaysia emerges as one of the most prepared producer countries, ensuring smallholders are neither marginalised nor excluded due to onerous compliance thresholds. Indonesia, by contrast, accentuated sovereignty and domestic absorption through energy policy, revealing a bifurcation in strategic paradigms: Malaysia foregrounded compliance and transparency; Indonesia, volume-led energy optimisation. Traceability as a Balance-Sheet Variable By 2025, traceability had transcended reputational optics to become a quantifiable balance-sheet consideration. Corporations sourcing palm oil across packaged foods, personal care, and industrial applications faced intensifying scrutiny—not only from civil society or consumers, but increasingly from investors, credit agencies, and insurers. Land-use and biodiversity risk became measurable, incorporated into credit decisions, equity analyses, and ESG-linked investment frameworks. Platforms such as Morningstar Sustainalytics furnished investors with insights into company deforestation-management programmes, grievance mechanisms, and auditing efficacy. The findings revealed heterogeneity: while many corporations maintained formal protocols, traceability often concluded at the mill rather than the plantation; grievance systems were inconsistently implemented, and audit rigor varied. Exemplars—Unilever, Danone, and Colgate-Palmolive—invested in plantation-level verification, supplier engagement, and transparent reporting. In 2025, traceability ceased to be a mere compliance cost; it was a licence to operate and a strategic differentiator. Why Deforestation Persists Despite decades of advocacy, corporate commitments, and regulatory initiatives, deforestation associated with palm oil expansion endures. The sector’s scale renders it highly visible within ESG discourses. Since the mid-2000s, production has more than doubled, surpassing 78 million tonnes by the mid-2020s. Expansion, particularly in Indonesia, continues to impinge upon forested tracts, exacerbated by fragmented land tenure, smallholder pressures, and uneven local enforcement. Forest clearance, accelerating after periods of relative stabilisation, underscores the fragility of prior progress. With demand projected to multiply several-fold by mid-century, pressures on forest ecosystems will intensify unless sustainable intensification, yield enhancement, and smallholder integration are prioritised. Failure to reverse these trends imperils climate targets and supply chain stability alike. Investors Reprice Land-Use Risk Until recently, corporate linkages to deforestation were largely reputational. By 2025, financial consequences crystallised. Investors recalibrated portfolios to account for regulatory risk, supply chain disruption, and reputational exposure. Corporations with robust, traceable supply chains—particularly in Malaysia—garnered competitive advantage. Estate-based models, cooperative smallholder programmes, and national certification systems underpinned compliance at scale. Anti-deforestation programmes now functioned dually: regulatory shields and risk mitigants. They reduce the probability of shipment rejection, contractual disruption, or exclusion from regulated markets. In a tightening ESG milieu, corporations lacking rigorous programmes faced escalating operational and financial vulnerability. Indonesia’s Biodiesel Pivot and Smallholder Dynamics While ESG reshaped demand, energy policy and production structures redefined supply. Indonesia, the world’s premier palm oil producer, accounted for approximately 55 per cent of global output in 2025. Its aggressive biodiesel expansion redirected millions of tonnes of crude palm oil away from exports, delivering domestic benefits: diminished fuel imports, stabilised farmer income, and political capital in rural constituencies. For global markets, however, this constricted supply, elevated price floors, and intensified volatility. The production landscape is further complicated by smallholders, who constitute nearly half of output yet exhibit yields of merely two to three tonnes per hectare—substantially lower than the six to eight tonnes typical of larger estates. The yield disparity, coupled with restricted access to finance, technology, and certification mechanisms, introduces material risks to both smallholder livelihoods and national competitiveness. Multinational buyers and investors must factor this heterogeneity into assessments of supply reliability and compliance risk. Export Flows, Trade, and Price Dynamics in 2025 Indonesian palm oil maintained global competitiveness in 2025, underpinned by robust export flows and new trade arrangements, including a free trade pact with the Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). Malaysia’s exports rose 7.7 per cent month-on-month to 1.42 million tonnes in September, marking the strongest monthly performance in nearly a year, according to the Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC). Gains were driven by most key regions, excluding EU27 and Asia-Pacific. South Asia, notably India, absorbed 312,000 tonnes—the highest level in 11 months. Exports to Sub-Saharan Africa, MENA, the Americas, and Central Asia also expanded appreciably. Despite export growth, inventories in Malaysia climbed to 2.36 million tonnes, the highest in 22 months, reflecting normalised domestic consumption after a record August of 499,000 tonnes. Imports increased by 20,000 tonnes, further swelling stocks. Palm oil reclaimed a premium over soybean oil in global markets. By mid-October, it traded $ 42 per tonne above soybean oil in Europe and $ 26 higher in India. The brief April–September discount reversed partly due to speculation surrounding Indonesia’s potential B50 biodiesel mandate, which would require an estimated 17 million tonnes of palm oil—3 million tonnes more than the existing B40 mandate—absorbing roughly 35 per cent of domestic output and leaving about 22 million tonnes for export. Global vegetable oil dynamics were also affected by constrained soybean and sunflower oil supplies. US and Brazilian soybean oil exports were projected to decline 41 per cent year-on-year, while Argentina’s temporary export tax exemption triggered forward sales to China, curtailing local crushing activity. Sunflower oil prices remained elevated, trading $ 75 above palm oil and $ 100 above soybean oil in Europe. The ongoing US–China trade conflict further accentuated supply uncertainty. MPOC forecasted continued firmness in vegetable oil prices, with palm oil expected to sustain levels above RM4,400 per tonne, although market sentiment remained circumspect due to crude oil volatility, inventories in key markets, and geopolitical tension. Investor Flows: Singapore Mid-Cap Initiative Capital markets, too, were active arbiters of sectoral trajectories. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) allocated USD5 billion to fund managers to seed investments in promising mid-cap companies, opening a conduit for capital into Southeast Asian agribusiness equities, including palm oil-related stocks. On 6 October, Fullerton Fund Management launched Fullerton Singapore Value-Up, the first retail fund under the MAS programme, investing across small-, mid-, and large-cap Singapore-listed securities. Although specific counters were undisclosed, UOB Kay Hian and Maybank Research projected that First Resources and Golden Agri-Resources would attract significant allocation. First Resources is a constituent of the iEdge Singapore Next 50 indexes, which track the largest 50 stocks by market capitalisation and liquidity after excluding the 30 blue-chip Straits Times Index components. Investors may also access palm oil exposure via Wilmar International, whose diversified portfolio encompasses cultivation, processing, and downstream integration. Collectively, these initiatives underscore the evolving interplay between regulatory compliance, supply-side dynamics, and financial capital in shaping the sector’s trajectory. Trade, Diplomacy, and Fragmentation By 2025, the geopolitics of palm oil had become a complex lattice of strategic alignments, regulatory signalling, and market-driven diplomacy. The commodity was no longer merely a trade good; it had become an instrument of soft power and economic leverage. Indonesia, cognizant of the increasing stringency of ESG-led frameworks in Western markets, consciously pivoted toward alternative trading partners less encumbered by regulatory rigor. The Russia-led Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) emerged as a natural conduit for Jakarta, offering not only expanded market access but also alignment with nations prioritising volume and energy security over deforestation compliance. This move, while pragmatic, reflected a broader Indonesian strategy: to diversify market dependency, reduce exposure to punitive ESG regimes, and safeguard domestic policy autonomy, particularly for its biodiesel mandates. Meanwhile, China deepened its engagement with ASEAN producers through bilateral and regional sustainability frameworks that, while aligned with some ESG principles, emphasised pragmatism, market access, and domestic food security over the stringent verifications required in Europe. Beijing’s approach facilitated preferential supply agreements, capacity-building programmes, and technical partnerships, reinforcing its position as a reliable purchaser even when Western markets imposed conditionality. In effect, China was cultivating a parallel governance ecosystem, one that harmonised sustainability ambitions with commercial expediency and regional diplomacy. Malaysia, by contrast, exercised a strategy of calibrated optionality. Kuala Lumpur maintained robust engagement with Europe through the National Traceability System, signalling compliance and reliability to ESG-conscious markets. Simultaneously, it expanded trade with India, the Middle East, and select premium Asian markets, leveraging both volume and differentiated quality to maximise revenue capture. By maintaining dual-track diplomacy—regulatory alignment on one hand and diversified market cultivation on the other—Malaysia positioned itself as a stabilising hub in an increasingly fragmented global palm oil system. Trade flows in 2025 increasingly mirrored governance credibility and regulatory compliance rather than mere production scale. Buyers and investors were willing to pay premiums for traceable, verified supply, while markets perceived as opaque or non-compliant faced exclusion or price discounts. The result was a discernible segmentation of the global palm oil market: Europe and other ESG-driven markets demanded documented compliance; Asia, the Middle East, and parts of Africa prioritised reliability, cost, and availability, with flexibility on verification protocols. In this context, trade negotiations, bilateral agreements, and regional alliances were no longer ancillary; they were central to the strategic calculus of producers, exporters, and financiers. Ultimately, 2025 crystallised a geopolitical realignment in which the governance architecture of production—traceability systems, certification frameworks, and ESG adherence—became as critical as volume and price. Palm oil diplomacy had transformed from a commodity-driven exercise into a multidimensional contest of regulatory compliance, market access, and strategic hedging, where producers and consumers alike navigated a terrain defined as much by geopolitics as by supply and demand. The 2025 Inflection Point The year 2025 crystallised a structural inflection in the global palm oil sector, marking a decisive transition from a volume-centric commodity paradigm to a governance- and compliance-driven ecosystem. Several concurrent developments coalesced to create a new hierarchy in which risk management, regulatory adherence, and strategic market positioning became paramount determinants of success. Foremost among these developments was the advance of the European Union’s Regulation on Deforestation-free Products (EUDR) toward formal enforcement. While the regulation’s compliance timeline was deferred, the underlying imperative remained unambiguous: companies sourcing palm oil and related commodities must demonstrate traceable, deforestation-free supply chains. This regulatory shift transformed what had been largely voluntary sustainability commitments into non-negotiable operational requirements, compelling corporations to invest in verification systems, engage smallholders, and enhance plantation-level transparency. Failure to comply now carried not only reputational risk but the tangible prospect of market exclusion from one of the largest consumer blocs in the world. Simultaneously, traceability emerged as a critical commercial and strategic variable. Corporations with robust, transparent systems could command premiums, reassure investors, and secure long-term contracts, whereas opaque supply chains faced escalating scrutiny. Malaysia’s integrated traceability framework, underpinned by the National Traceability System, positioned the nation advantageously, allowing it to capture value in premium markets and establish itself as a benchmark for ESG-aligned supply. On the supply side, Indonesia’s biodiesel mandate—particularly the potential B50 programme—substantially tightened exportable volumes. By redirecting millions of tonnes of palm oil to domestic biofuel blending, Jakarta effectively altered global supply-demand balances, introducing volatility and reinforcing price floors. The policy simultaneously underscored the strategic interplay between domestic energy security, rural political considerations, and international trade, highlighting the multifaceted levers that now influence market dynamics. Capital flows further accentuated the structural pivot. The Monetary Authority of Singapore’s $5 billion mid-cap investment initiative and subsequent fund launches, including Fullerton Singapore Value-Up, enhanced liquidity and investor engagement in palm oil equities, particularly for companies demonstrating regulatory compliance, governance robustness, and operational scalability. Singaporean capital thus became an active arbiter of sectoral trajectory, incentivising transparency and risk mitigation alongside traditional commercial metrics. Taken together, these forces crystallised a paradigm shift. The sector no longer operates purely on supply and demand fundamentals; market leadership is now contingent on a confluence of regulatory compliance, traceable and resilient supply chains, capital access, and strategic diplomatic positioning. Malaysia’s emphasis on governance and traceability, Indonesia’s energy-driven production strategy, and Singapore’s investment facilitation collectively signal that the hierarchy of winners and laggards is defined as much by institutional sophistication and market foresight as by hectares under cultivation or tonnage produced. In essence, 2025 represents a structural inflection point where risk, governance, and access have supplanted volume as the primary arbiters of sectoral pre-eminence. The golden crop retains its centrality in global food and energy systems, but its stewardship is now measured not merely in production metrics, but in the rigour of its governance, the transparency of its supply chain, and the agility of its market and investment strategies. Conditional Leadership Palm oil retained its crown in 2025—but with a crucial caveat: the sovereignty of this dominion is now conditional. The commodity’s indispensability remains, yet supremacy must be earned through governance, traceability, policy foresight, and strategic alignment. Malaysia exemplifies conditional resilience via compliance, integration, and premiumisation. Indonesia demonstrates the benefits—and perils—of volume-led energy policy and smallholder reliance. Singapore’s investor mobilisation illustrates that financial capital is an increasingly potent arbiter of the sector’s future. In a post-ESG, post-2025 world, palm oil’s legitimacy is adjudicated not by hectares, yields, or sheer tonnage, but by proof of governance, verifiable traceability, sustainability credentials, and alignment with the exigencies of investors and regulators. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3493/asias-seafood-exports-in-2025-tariffs-trade-deals-and-market-shifts.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3493/asias-seafood-exports-in-2025-tariffs-trade-deals-and-market-shifts.html Tue, 23 Dec 2025 17:35:11 +0530 In 2025, Asian seafood exporters operated in an increasingly complex global trade architecture. The combined effects of tariffs imposed by the United States and European Union, alongside emerging free trade agreements such as CEPA and CETA, created both constraints and opportunities for the region’s leading producers. Unlike previous periods of growth, which relied primarily on volume expansion, the defining feature of 2025 was strategic adjustment. Exporters leveraged certification, vertical integration, and market diversification to sustain revenue and stabilize margins. This article examines the quantitative and structural underpinnings of Asian seafood performance in 2025, with a focus on India, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand, highlighting revenue resilience, supply chain efficiencies, and policy interventions. It identifies winners and underperformers and explores the mechanisms through which exporters mitigated trade and operational risks. Tariff Pressures: Country-Wise Quantification In India, shrimp and cuttlefish exports were affected by U.S. tariffs ranging between 10 and 15 percent on processed shrimp. Despite a modest four percent decline in volume, totaling 370,000 metric tonnes, export value fell only 1.5 percent, demonstrating the mitigating effect of premiumization. Indian exporters increasingly focused on high-quality, value-added products while CEPA agreements with GCC countries partially offset U.S. market constraints. The EU remained an important secondary market, where tariffs were stable, though sustainability mandates favored ASC and MSC-certified products. Government-backed export subsidies and cold-chain incentives, totaling roughly $80 million, further strengthened competitiveness. Vietnam’s seafood sector illustrates how targeted strategies can offset international trade pressures. Shrimp continued to dominate the product structure, generating nearly $410 million in September, which brought the nine-month export value to over $3.38 billion—a 20.3 percent increase year-on-year. Pangasius also recorded strong performance, with September turnover approaching $191 million and total exports exceeding $1.6 billion over nine months, up almost ten percent. The resurgence of demand from China, the U.S., Japan, and Middle Eastern markets reinforced Vietnam’s position as a leading global supplier of both freshwater and marine seafood. Other segments also performed well: marine fish exports grew to $1.61 billion (+18.5 per cent), squid and octopus reached $550 million (+18.7 per cent), and shelled mollusks rose more than 30 to $192 million. Tuna exports, however, slightly declined to $705 million (-3.2 per cent), reflecting intensified competition in the oceanic fish segment. The U.S. market showed slower growth for Vietnam, with September exports down more than six percent. Nonetheless, nine-month totals still rose 6.8 percent to $1.41 billion. Challenges such as anti-dumping and countervailing duties, along with stringent MMPA requirements, continue to constrain U.S.-bound shipments. China and Hong Kong emerged as dominant markets, with nine-month exports reaching $1.76 billion (+32.1 per cent), benefiting from strong demand and favorable logistics. Japan and the EU maintained steady growth at $1.27 billion (+15.6 per cent) and $885 million (+13.3 per cent), respectively, while South Korea emerged as a breakout market with nearly 50 per cent growth in September and a 13 per cent increase over nine months. ASEAN and Middle Eastern markets also expanded, recording $536 million (+23.3 per cent) and $295 million (+7.6 per cent), respectively, with the Middle East seeing more than 50 percent growth in September alone. Indonesia’s seafood sector leveraged CEPA agreements with GCC countries to expand market access for shrimp and tuna. Customs duty reductions of 3–5 percent directly improved gross margins for exporters targeting Gulf markets. By the end of 2025, GCC markets accounted for nearly 30 percent of Indonesia’s shrimp and tuna export value, a marked diversification from traditional U.S. and EU destinations. Investment in refrigerated shipping increased capacity by 12 percent year-on-year, enabling exporters to maintain product quality, meet CEPA compliance requirements, and improve realized margins by 7–10 per cent. Thailand focused on high-value shrimp and squid, using CETA provisions to facilitate faster EU customs clearance, reducing compliance costs by an estimated seven percent. Cold-chain adoption reached 70 percent for premium products, ensuring consistent quality for EU and Japanese markets.  The country occupied a structurally distinct position within Asia’s seafood economy in 2025—less exposed to sudden market shocks and more anchored in processing-led value creation. Total fishery exports were valued at approximately $7 billion, while imports stood near US$5 billion, reflecting Thailand’s dual role as both a processing hub and a trading intermediary within global seafood flows. Japan remained Thailand’s most important destination, accounting for roughly one-third of export value, followed by Europe at just over one-fifth, and the United States at around 16 per cent. This market mix insulated Thailand from excessive dependence on any single trade corridor, particularly at a time when U.S. regulatory scrutiny intensified across the region.   Market Diversification and Revenue Stability Revenue diversification proved crucial for mitigating tariff and market risks. India derived 38 percent of export revenue from the U.S., 27 percent from the EU, and 15 percent from GCC countries, illustrating a portfolio approach that cushioned U.S. tariff impacts. Vietnam’s revenue was 32 percent from the U.S., 40 percent from the EU, and 10 percent from GCC markets, with EU growth largely driven by certification and premiumization. Indonesia relied on 20 percent from the U.S., 25 percent from the EU, and 30 percent from GCC markets, demonstrating a deliberate CEPA-driven diversification strategy. Thailand sourced 28 percent of revenue from the U.S., 35 percent from the EU, and 12 percent from GCC markets, relying on premium frozen products to maintain margins despite modest volume growth. Countries with multi-market exposure experienced less than three percent year-on-year revenue variation, while single-market-reliant exporters faced fluctuations of six to seven percent. Certification and value-added products enabled India and Vietnam to absorb U.S. tariff pressures, Indonesia’s GCC expansion cushioned revenue variability, and Thailand’s focus on premium EU/Japan markets stabilized returns. Revenue, Volume, and Commodity Performance Export value growth across the four leading countries was moderate but consistent. India achieved $7.8 billion in shrimp and cuttlefish exports, a four percent increase driven by premiumization, CEPA market access, and traceability initiatives. Vietnam’s nine-month exports surpassed $8.3 billion, reflecting strong performance in shrimp, pangasius, marine fish, and mollusks. Indonesia reached $4.5 billion (+3 per cent), supported by CEPA access and selective premium exports, while Thailand achieved $6.0 billion (+2 per cent), led by premium shrimp and squid targeting EU and Japanese markets. Certification, traceability, and vertical integration contributed an estimated 3–5 percent of revenue growth, offsetting tariff pressures. Commodity-grade exports without value addition, particularly to the U.S., underperformed, reinforcing the premiumization imperative. Commodity price dynamics mirrored these strategies. Export-grade shrimp from India, Vietnam, and Thailand stabilized at $12–13 per kilogram, with premium segments commanding 5–10 percent higher prices. Pangasius from Vietnam ranged $3.8–4.2 per kilogram, with certified fillets averaging $4.5 per kilogram. Tuna from Indonesia reached $6–6.5 per kilogram, with supply chain optimization contributing a 3–4 percent improvement in realized price. Thailand’s squid exports realized $10–11 per kilogram, with premium frozen products yielding additional margins. These trends underscore the importance of B2B investment in cold-chain, certification, and value-added processing in preserving price resilience. Supply Chain Sophistication: Cold-Chain and Vertical Integration Efficient supply chains proved decisive. In India, 45 percent of shrimp exports relied on company-owned cold storage, 30 percent on outsourced facilities, and 15–20 percent on rented units. Vertical integration reduced transaction costs by 5–8 percent and cut delivery delays by 15 percent. In Vietnam, 60 percent of pangasius exports passed through certified cold-chain facilities, enabling compliance with EU Green Fisheries regulations and higher realized prices. Indonesia expanded refrigerated shipping by 12 percent YOY, supporting margin improvements of 7–10 percent. Thailand’s 70 percent cold-chain adoption for high-value shrimp, combined with process efficiency, reinforced operational resilience. Companies managing production, processing, and logistics internally responded faster to tariff and compliance shifts, demonstrating the advantage of vertical integration in mitigating operational risk. Structural Lessons from 2025 Certification and traceability were decisive, with ASC/MSC/HACCP-compliant producers outperforming peers by 5–12 percent in realized export prices. Market diversification reduced volatility, with multi-market-reliant countries experiencing ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3492/asia-agriculture-2025-climate-technology-and-resilience.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3492/asia-agriculture-2025-climate-technology-and-resilience.html Tue, 23 Dec 2025 17:25:37 +0530 2025 marked a pivotal year for agriculture across Asia. Headlines captured extreme weather events, AI-driven agritech deployments, and climate-smart policy initiatives, yet beneath the surface, the region’s agricultural landscape quietly evolved. The sector is moving from reactive interventions to embedding resilience across systems, blending technology, policy innovation, and climate-smart practices to withstand unprecedented uncertainty. Across Asia, nearly half of agricultural production remains exposed to climate hazards. Cyclones, floods, and prolonged droughts disrupted key farming regions, from the rice belts of Southeast Asia to rainfed areas in South Asia. Cyclone Ditwah, for example, struck Sri Lanka in late 2025, devastating hundreds of thousands of hectares, displacing millions, and creating ripple effects in food prices, supply chains, and rural incomes. Such events are increasingly expected variables, forcing governments, firms, and farmers to rethink risk, finance, and resilience. Beyond immediate shocks, persistent weather volatility erodes predictability, undermines smallholder decision-making, and increases financial exposure. Against this backdrop, Asia’s agriculture is quietly pivoting toward anticipatory, climate-smart strategies that combine technology, finance, and policy to reduce vulnerability and enhance food security. Policy Evolution: From Concept to Action In 2025, several APAC countries moved beyond conceptual climate adaptation policies to operational programs. South Asia launched national climate adaptation atlases linking meteorological projections with agronomic and socioeconomic data, enabling governments to prioritize interventions based on localized risk profiles. Regional cooperation progressed notably. The ASEAN Climate Resilience Network implemented joint projects in climate-smart agriculture, including shared weather data platforms and cross-border pilot programs in precision irrigation and soil management. Southeast Asia also witnessed the scaling of climate-smart agriculture frameworks, integrating resilience measures into national planning and budget cycles. Governments increasingly tie climate adaptation to economic competitiveness. Countries implementing predictive, data-driven approaches are better positioned to access global markets, attract international finance, and partner in technology deployment. This marks a structural shift in agricultural governance, where climate adaptation is embedded as a core economic priority rather than a supplementary policy. Technology at the Core: AI, Data, and Agritech Ecosystems Technology transitioned from experimental pilot programs to operational infrastructure in 2025. Artificial intelligence, satellite imagery, and remote sensing became integral to decision-making at farm, regional, and national levels. Singapore-based and regional startups scaled AI-powered platforms to optimize irrigation, forecast yields, monitor pests, and provide real-time weather intelligence. Farmers now have predictive tools that were previously accessible only to large-scale operations. In India, AI-driven platforms enabled precise nutrient management, automated irrigation scheduling, and early pest detection, reducing losses and improving input efficiency. Innovation ecosystems matured across APAC. Accelerators in Singapore, Thailand, and Indonesia connected startups, research institutions, and financial services providers, nurturing ventures in sustainable inputs, precision agriculture, and supply-chain traceability. By embedding technology into governance and finance frameworks, Asia is laying the foundation for scalable climate-smart agriculture that benefits both smallholders and commercial producers. Climate and Food Safety: Emerging Challenges Climate variability increasingly affects food safety. Rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, and water scarcity alter microbial dynamics, increase mycotoxin risk, and disrupt post-harvest storage conditions. Regulatory adaptation became central to maintaining food security. As Sarah Cahill, Codex Secretary, and Markus Lipp, Senior Food Safety Officer, FAO explains: "Changing climate is also impacting food safety and this is also impacting the standard setting work of Codex. For example, the Codex Committee on Contaminants in Food (CCCF) elaborated and CAC47 adopted the Code of practice for the prevention or reduction of ciguatera poisoning, in response to the evolving nature of this issue, which is related to climate factors. The Codex Committee on Food Hygiene developed and CAC46 adopted Guidelines for the safe use and reuse of water in food production and processing in response to Members concerns about the need to ensure that in the context of water resource challenges, the safety of food was not negatively impacted. There is a continued emphasis, particularly within CCCF, on the issue of mycotoxins, the threat of which is evolving and possibly expanding as climate factors change." Countries across Asia integrated climate intelligence into inspection systems and food safety protocols to mitigate risk, ensuring that resilience does not compromise quality or trade compliance. Climate and Food Security: Hydroponics and Controlled Environments Controlled environment agriculture, including hydroponics and vertical farming, scaled rapidly across India and Southeast Asia in 2025, mitigating risks from erratic rainfall, droughts, and extreme weather. Pravin Patel, Founder of Brio Hydroponics, highlights the potential: "India’s agricultural sector faces unprecedented challenges from climate volatility, with erratic rainfall, prolonged droughts, and extreme weather disrupting traditional farming cycles. Over half of Indian farmers depend entirely on rain-fed agriculture, making them highly vulnerable. Controlled Environment Agriculture systems like Unnati’s hydroponics offer a solution, creating fully controlled growing environments that eliminate weather dependency and enable consistent, year-round production." These systems stabilize production, optimize resource use, and reduce climate risk. While current adoption is concentrated on high-value crops, pilot programs are extending controlled environment cultivation to staples, demonstrating the potential to enhance broader food security. Seafood and Fisheries: Data-Driven Management and Trade Competitiveness The fisheries sector witnessed headline-making reforms in 2025. India completed the MFC 2025 fisheries census, providing the first comprehensive assessment of fleet health, fishing capacity, and ecosystem impact. George Kurian, Minister of State for Minority Affairs, Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Government of India, emphasizes: "International markets like the EU, US, and Japan demand proof of sustainability and traceability. The MFC 2025 provides the foundation for meeting these expectations. This Census is the foundational layer for a sustainable ecosystem-based fisheries management plan. It gives us a complete, scientifically-consolidated assessment of our fleet’s health and capacity." The initiative strengthens ecosystem-based management and aligns seafood production with global sustainability standards, enhancing export competitiveness. Rice Resilience: Lessons for Rainfed Systems Rainfed rice areas remain among the most climate-exposed agricultural systems. Climate shocks disproportionately affect yields, particularly in lowlands. Dr. Ismail Abdelbagi, Principal Scientist and Regional Representative for Africa at IRRI, notes: "Climate shocks are hitting rice hardest in rainfed lowlands, where 80 per cent of Africa’s farmers operate. How close are we to a breakthrough in drought- and heat-resilient varieties that can stabilize yields without costly irrigation infrastructure? Rainfed rice areas in Africa have not been given sufficient attention, and farmers still use traditional tools and technologies. This is contrary to progress in Asia, where rainfed areas have been transformed into productive lands with high and stable yields. The transformation became feasible after introducing varieties tolerant to drought, floods, and salt stress, coupled with modern production technologies, water management, fertilizer use, mechanized farming, and other suitable practices, increasing productivity and incomes for smallholders." This highlights the importance of combining genetic improvements, production technology, and agronomic practices to transform vulnerable systems into resilient landscapes. Carbon, Regeneration, and Climate Finance Regenerative and carbon-focused interventions expanded significantly in 2025. Biochar projects, combining carbon sequestration with soil fertility improvements, emerged as high-value initiatives. Dr. Nripanka Das, Subject Matter Expert in Carbon Projects (UAE), explains: "Unlike forestry or renewable projects, biochar delivers a dual benefit: carbon sequestration and soil regeneration. This creates 'stacked benefits'—carbon credits, improved yields, reduced fertilizer use, enhanced water retention, and often waste management solutions. Financially, a well-designed biochar project can generate over $1,000 per hectare annually when combining carbon and agricultural returns, while diversifying revenue and reducing risk—making it highly attractive for institutional investors." Blue carbon initiatives also gained traction. Brian Tsuyoshi Takeda, CEO & Co-Founder of Restorae, observes: "Voluntary carbon markets in Japan are already ready for kelp-based credits. J-Blue Credits, generated from kelp restoration, have been transacting for years at prices exceeding $400 per ton—more than ten times the price of traditional voluntary carbon credits globally." These approaches demonstrate how climate-smart practices can generate measurable environmental and financial returns while enhancing resilience. Financing Resilience: Opportunities and Bottlenecks Access to climate finance remains critical for scaling adaptation. Platforms supporting banks, microfinance institutions, and insurers expanded in 2025 to offer bundled climate-smart products combining credit, insurance, and solar-powered irrigation. Dr. Godefroy Grosjean, Co-lead of CGIAR’s Hub for Sustainable Finance (ImpactSF) and Ena Derenoncourt, Senior Officer at the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT and ACT-H Project Lead highlight: "ImpactSF helps financial institutions design climate-smart, bankable products that reduce risk and deliver real impact for farmers. By combining capacity building, tools, and pipeline strengthening, it supports banks, MFIs, and insurers to create bundled credit, insurance, and solar-powered irrigation solutions. Using data from the ImpactSF Analyzer and a value-chain approach, it scales finance in priority sectors like horticulture and livestock while ensuring measurable outcomes in resilience, productivity, and gender inclusion." Data-driven climate finance is increasingly linking risk mitigation, sustainability, and measurable impact, expanding opportunities for smallholders. Trade and Market Resilience Regional trade is a critical lever for resilience. Fragmented intra-Asian trade and regulatory differences limit local food system equity. Dr. Ana Maria Loboguerrero, Director for Adaptive and Equitable Food Systems at the Gates Foundation, observes: "Today, South Asia primarily exports staple crops and processed products globally, missing opportunities to build resilient local ecosystems through regional collaboration. Variations in regulations and logistics limit progress, keeping intraregional trade fragmented. Harmonizing trade can reduce food prices, buffer against climate shocks, stimulate crop diversification, and support unified responses to climate-driven pest spread." In 2025, several countries advanced harmonization, streamlining certifications, improving logistics, and adopting risk-mitigating frameworks for climate-sensitive commodities, stabilizing prices and supporting crop diversification. Technology Goes Mainstream In 2025, digital agriculture in Asia crossed a point of no return. Artificial intelligence and climate-tech tools stopped being framed as pilots or “future-ready” concepts and instead became part of the operating backbone of agricultural systems across multiple countries. What distinguished the year was not innovation itself, but scale, speed, and institutional adoption. In India, AI-powered climate advisory systems reached operational maturity. Large-scale deployments began delivering hyper-local, real-time advisories to farmers across rainfed and irrigated regions, combining weather forecasts, soil moisture data, crop-stage intelligence, and pest-risk alerts. These advisories increasingly influenced sowing decisions, irrigation scheduling, and input use at the village level, reducing crop losses during erratic monsoon phases and prolonged dry spells. Importantly, these systems were not standalone apps; they were integrated with public extension networks, crop insurance triggers, and digital soil health programs—signaling a shift from fragmented pilots to systemic use. China accelerated the use of drones, sensors, and satellite-linked AI platforms across its rice belts and horticulture clusters. In several provinces, drone-assisted monitoring of crop health, nutrient stress, and water use became routine rather than exceptional. AI models processed high-frequency imagery to guide precision spraying, optimize irrigation intervals, and flag early pest outbreaks. The emphasis was not just productivity, but climate efficiency—reducing water use, lowering chemical runoff, and stabilizing yields amid heat stress events that have become more frequent across eastern China. Across Southeast Asia, climate intelligence became a national priority rather than a sectoral experiment. Vietnam and Thailand deployed machine-learning models to simulate flood scenarios in delta regions, helping authorities adjust planting calendars, pre-position inputs, and manage water releases. These systems informed both farmers and policymakers, aligning field-level decisions with basin-level water management. In Indonesia, AI-based drought prediction tools were linked to food logistics planning, enabling early interventions in vulnerable provinces before shortages escalated into price shocks. The Philippines took a different but equally significant route, integrating digital tools into climate-risk governance. AI-driven early warning systems for typhoons and floods were connected directly to agricultural insurance payouts and emergency credit lines. When climate thresholds were breached, farmers gained faster access to relief and recovery finance, reducing the lag between disaster and response that has historically deepened rural distress. Meanwhile, Japan and South Korea focused on high-precision digital agriculture aligned with climate adaptation and labor constraints. Robotics, AI-driven greenhouse management, and sensor-based water control systems were scaled to stabilize production under heat stress and demographic pressure. These technologies also fed into traceability and sustainability reporting systems, strengthening market access and compliance in export-oriented supply chains. Underlying these country-level deployments was the rapid expansion of climate-focused agri-tech incubators and accelerators across APAC. In 2025, these platforms prioritized startups that could deliver precision farming, advanced water-use efficiency, and climate-resilient supply chains at scale. The shift was clear: solutions were evaluated not on novelty, but on their ability to operate under stress—poor connectivity, extreme weather, fragmented landholdings, and tight margins. The cumulative effect of these developments is structural. Technology in Asian agriculture is no longer an add-on or productivity enhancer; it has become a risk-management infrastructure. AI systems now sit alongside insurance, credit, and public policy as essential tools for coping with climate volatility. By the end of 2025, climate intelligence was no longer aspirational—it was operational, embedded, and increasingly indispensable to how Asia grows its food. A Sector Quietly Transforming 2025 was not merely a year of crises or headline-grabbing innovations; it marked the quiet transformation of Asia’s agricultural landscape. Technology, policy, finance, and on-farm practices converged to create systems capable of anticipating, absorbing, and adapting to climate shocks. Across the region, several developments underscored this shift. India completed the MFC 2025 fisheries Census, providing critical data for ecosystem-based management and ensuring traceability in seafood exports. In Japan, blue carbon and kelp restoration initiatives expanded significantly, creating measurable environmental benefits while generating high-value carbon credits. China deployed drone-assisted climate-smart agriculture across its rice belts, integrating real-time monitoring of soil, water, and pest conditions to optimize yields and resilience. Meanwhile, Indonesia and Vietnam piloted regenerative aquaculture and rice-straw-to-energy programs, linking circular economy principles with climate-smart food production. In the Philippines, community-managed solar-powered irrigation systems strengthened local resilience and reduced reliance on grid electricity, while Thailand and Malaysia launched AI-enabled early warning systems that connect flood and drought forecasts directly to insurance and credit mechanisms, helping farmers manage climate risk proactively. These initiatives, coupled with broader adoption of hydroponics, climate-resilient crops, biochar, and regional trade integration, illustrate how adaptation, market competitiveness, and systemic resilience are increasingly intertwined. The focus is not merely on technology deployment or policy announcements; it is on integrating solutions across the farm, market, and financial ecosystem to create durable, scalable outcomes. While challenges remain in ensuring equitable access to technology, finance, and infrastructure, the foundations for a smarter, adaptive, and climate-resilient agricultural sector are firmly established. The structural and technological shifts achieved in 2025 will have far-reaching consequences for food security, rural livelihoods, and economic stability across Asia for decades. In an era defined by climate uncertainty, the region’s agriculture demonstrates that meaningful transformation is possible not through headline-grabbing innovations alone, but through sustained, coordinated, and system-wide innovation. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3491/tariffs-tradecraft-and-turbulence-how-2025-rewired-asias-agri-economy.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3491/tariffs-tradecraft-and-turbulence-how-2025-rewired-asias-agri-economy.html Tue, 23 Dec 2025 17:14:23 +0530 By the end of 2025, Asia’s agricultural economy is no longer being shaped primarily by climate cycles, productivity gains, or technology adoption. It has been being shaped by policy—and more specifically, by tariffs wielded as instruments of economic power. What distinguished 2025 from earlier episodes of protectionism was not merely escalation, but intent. Tariffs were no longer episodic responses to domestic political pressure or trade imbalances. They became systemic tools of statecraft, used to discipline trading partners, signal geopolitical alignment, manage inflation, and re-engineer supply chains. Agriculture and agri-food—once treated as sensitive sectors to be insulated from trade wars—were pulled decisively into the crosshairs. The result was not a uniform slowdown across Asia, but a profound reallocation of growth, capital, and competitiveness. Some economies absorbed the shock through diversification and regional integration. Others—more exposed to Western demand or narrow growth engines—stumbled. At the center of this reset stood a single catalyst: the United States’ reciprocal tariff regime. When Reciprocity Turned Punitive: The U.S. Tariff Doctrine Expands In 2025, Washington aggressively expanded what it framed as a reciprocal tariff regime—a doctrine that justified punitive import duties as corrective responses to perceived protectionism abroad. What began as a manufacturing-centric strategy quickly widened. Agricultural and agri-food commodities—processed foods, spices, horticulture products, and value-added farm exports—were swept into the policy’s broad ambit. India and China emerged among the most exposed. Both faced double-digit tariff increases across a wide spectrum of agri and processed food exports to the U.S. market. For India, the shock was immediate. High-value categories such as tea, coffee, spices, tropical fruit concentrates, and essential oils suddenly faced duties as high as 50 percent, eroding competitiveness overnight. The policy logic in Washington was geopolitical. The economic fallout at home was inflationary. Rising food prices and higher input costs quickly fed into domestic pressure, forcing a partial recalibration. By mid-2025, the U.S. granted exemptions on over 200 food items, easing consumer inflation and offering selective relief to exporters. But the reprieve was tactical, not structural. The broader macroeconomic signal was unmistakable: tariffs were no longer tactical irritants. They had become structural levers of economic posture. Costs of capital goods, fertilisers, packaging materials, and intermediate inputs rose across supply chains. Demand in key Western markets softened just as financing tightened. Exporters were compelled to rethink market concentration, contract duration, and risk exposure—often simultaneously. Indian shipments of spices, coffee, and processed foods contracted sharply in the immediate aftermath of tariff escalation, stabilising only marginally after exemptions took effect. Pricing power remained constrained, compliance costs rose, and exporters increasingly treated the U.S. as a volatile rather than anchor market. For China, the moment marked a more decisive rupture. China’s Countermove: Retaliation Abroad, Re-Anchoring at Home Beijing responded to Washington’s tariff expansion not with restraint, but with design. As U.S. reciprocal tariffs widened through 2025, China escalated in parallel, lifting average tariffs on U.S. goods to above 50 percent, extending across nearly the entire import spectrum. Agriculture—once politically sensitive and strategically insulated—was decisively pulled into the contest. Soybeans, dairy, feed ingredients, and agri-processed goods were no longer collateral damage; they became leverage.The immediate effect was a sharp erosion of China’s price competitiveness in North America. Chinese agricultural exports lost ground, while U.S. farm commodities struggled to retain market share in China. But Beijing’s objective was not tactical retaliation alone. The deeper consequence was structural: a deliberate and accelerated de-risking of China’s agri-trade exposure to the United States.Rather than preserving U.S. trade volumes at escalating political and economic cost, Beijing pivoted toward regional realignment and supply-chain sovereignty. Agricultural sourcing diversified away from the United States—soybean procurement shifted toward Brazil and Argentina, dairy imports favored Oceania and Central Asia, and feedstocks moved toward multiple Latin American and Eurasian suppliers. On the export side, China prioritized Asia, the Middle East, and emerging markets, where tariffs were predictable, demand growth strong, and trade diplomacy aligned.The clearest evidence of this re-anchoring emerged in China’s agricultural trade with Southeast Asia. In 2025, China–ASEAN agri-food trade reached approximately USD 51 billion, rising close to 9 percent year-on-year, even as trade with OECD markets stagnated. Imports of rice and cereals surged by over 70 percent, plant oils rose roughly 17 percent, and seafood imports grew about 14 percent. Value-added products—starches, dried roots, and packaged foods—also expanded, reflecting a shift from raw input dependence to regional processing integration. Tariffs on intra-Asian trade were progressively reduced or eliminated under upgraded bilateral arrangements and RCEP-linked frameworks, allowing rice, fruits, seafood, coffee, and processed foods from ASEAN economies to flow into China with fewer barriers, even as access to Western markets remained restricted.A Tactical Truce: Managed Competition Replaces Open EscalationLate 2025 also brought a narrowly scoped, sector-specific recalibration in U.S.–China economic relations. The bilateral deal included renewed agricultural purchases, a reduction of fentanyl-related tariffs, and a pause on Chinese export controls, signaling a tactical easing of tensions without undermining China’s broader trade realignment.China committed to stop exporting fentanyl precursors to the United States and to effectively eliminate current and proposed export controls on rare earth elements and critical minerals. Beijing also agreed to end retaliatory tariffs and non-tariff measures on U.S. agricultural and other goods, resuming transactional flows in select sectors. In particular, China pledged to purchase at least 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans in the last two months of 2025 and 25 million metric tons annually from 2026 through 2028, reassuring American farm states and stabilizing global oilseed markets.In return, the United States agreed to reduce cumulative fentanyl-related tariffs on Chinese imports by 10 percent and suspend for one year Section 301 responsive actions related to maritime, logistics, and shipbuilding sectors. During this suspension, Washington will continue negotiations with China, while deepening industrial cooperation with South Korea and Japan to revitalize U.S. shipbuilding—underscoring that strategic competition, not reconciliation, remains the frame.Taken together, the agreement marked a temporary easing of tensions. While transactional flows resumed, China’s longer-term strategy—diversified sourcing, deeper ASEAN integration, and reduced reliance on any single corridor—remained intact. The truce stabilized volumes but did not restore dependency.Trade Realignment SolidifiesEven as U.S. soybean shipments were scheduled to resume, China’s agricultural trade had already been fundamentally restructured. ASEAN and intra-Asian trade became the primary stabilizer, with supply chains shortened, compliance costs lowered, and small-to-medium producers gaining access to markets previously hard to reach. Tariffs did not shrink China’s trade footprint—they redirected it, embedding resilience through diversification and regional integration.By the end of 2025, the outcome was unmistakable: agriculture had become both a lever of strategy and a barometer of resilience. Tariffs, once temporary instruments of pressure, were now permanent features in the architecture of global trade, shaping flows, redirecting supply chains, and compelling both the U.S. and China to recalibrate strategies across continents. India: Selective Protection, Strategic Diversification India’s agri-trade strategy in 2025 was defined by balancing domestic stability with global market access, navigating tariff disruptions while capitalising on structural export strengths.On the defensive front, New Delhi raised import duties on edible oils to support domestic oilseed growers, shielding rural incomes amid volatile global prices and chronic import dependence. Elevated edible oil duties helped contain import-induced price swings, but they also raised input costs for food processors and livestock producers that rely on imported feedstocks, squeezing margins just as exporters faced geopolitical tariff shocks in key Western markets.Simultaneously, India pursued liberalisation where export competitiveness mattered most. A case in point was rice. After years of export controls, the government fully dismantled long-standing rice shipment restrictions in late 2024 and early 2025, sending a powerful signal to global buyers. The payoff was immediate. In FY2024-25, India’s agricultural and processed food exports rose by over 13 percent, with rice shipments expanding sharply. Rice exports—including basmati and non-basmati varieties—reached $12.47 billion, up from $10.41 billion the year before, driven by stronger global demand following the removal of export curbs.Rice alone accounted for more than half of India’s agri-export value in that period, underscoring its structural importance and the impact of policy stability. In the first half of FY2025 - 26, rice exports continued to perform strongly: APEDA data show India’s agricultural exports climbed approximately 12 percent year-on-year to $13.93 billion in April–September 2025, with non-basmati rice rising nearly 28 percent by value and volume up more than 50 percent. Beyond rice, other hallmark commodities illustrated India’s export breadth in 2025: Spices, a traditional mainstay, crossed the $4 billion threshold in 2024-25 and continued to anchor export momentum into 2025, reflecting India’s leading global position in chilli, turmeric, cumin, and mixed spice blends. Coffee exports, including robusta and specialty Arabica beans, grew robustly—with early 2025 figures showing export values up nearly 48 percent year-on-year in April alone, as global supply tightness supported prices and shipments. Meat, dairy and poultry products also expanded in early 2025, with export values rising by roughly 15 percent in April compared to the year before, signalling diversification into higher-value protein shipments. These headline figures demonstrate that, despite tariff headwinds in the West, India’s agri-export portfolio remained both diverse and growth-oriented.To mitigate the tariff impact and broaden market access, India accelerated trade diversification—prioritising the Gulf, Africa, and select developed markets where agricultural concessions were feasible or where India has deep historical ties. Africa, historically a strong destination for Indian rice, pulses, and staples, continued to account for a significant share of agri exports, while India deepened engagement with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), including a landmark comprehensive economic partnership agreement with Oman granting zero-duty access to most Indian exports.Trade data from 2023 (the most recent detailed breakdown available) show that Asia accounted for roughly 58 percent of India’s agricultural exports, with Africa contributing about 15 percent and the U.S. roughly 13 percent. These regional patterns provided the basis for India’s strategic redirection in 2025 away from over-reliance on tariff-exposed developed markets toward near-region and Global South demand hubs. At the same time, India’s reliance on imported edible oils remained pronounced. Vegetable oils continued to dominate India’s farm import bill, reflecting deep structural demand. Domestic edible oil production lagged consumption, necessitating imports of palm, soy, and sunflower oils despite heightened tariffs—underscoring the limits of selective protection when underlying supply gaps persist.The strategic takeaway from 2025 was unambiguous: tariff protection can buy political stability, but export growth in an era of protectionist headwinds requires market access, diversification, and product upgrading. India’s calibrated approach—shielding vulnerable producers at home while restoring credibility in core export segments and pivoting toward growth markets abroad—reflected an evolving trade playbook tailored to a fractured global tariff landscape. ASEAN and RCEP: Tariffs Reduced, Resilience Built If 2025 proved anything, it was that regionalism worked—not as a shield against global disruption, but as a system for absorbing it.Under RCEP, intra-regional tariffs on agri goods, fertilisers, and processed foods continued to fall, while rules of origin were harmonized across 15 economies. Compliance costs dropped, supply chains shortened, and small-to-medium enterprises gained access to markets previously difficult to reach.Vietnam, Malaysia, and Thailand leveraged these preferences to maintain export momentum. Vietnam’s agri-food exports into Asia grew steadily, Malaysia sustained processed food and palm oil exports, and Thailand preserved rice, seafood, and agro-industrial export growth. Regional trade densification shortened supply chains, reduced intermediate import dependence, and embedded redundancy and resilience.RCEP did not eliminate volatility—but it re-routed trade rather than letting it collapse, providing predictability that offset shocks from U.S. and EU tariff policies. Southeast Asia’s Q3 Reckoning: Growth Under Tariff Pressure By Q3 2025, Southeast Asia was a live laboratory for tariff shocks: trade flows held firm, but growth split sharply across the region. According to " Southeast Asia quarterly economic review " by McKinsey & Company: Vietnam emerged as the standout performer, recording 8.2 percent GDP growth, the fastest in the region. Manufacturing and construction accelerated, services remained robust, and foreign investment flows stayed resilient. Even as tariff-exposed export segments slowed late in the quarter, Vietnam’s diversified industrial base cushioned the blow. Malaysia followed with 5.2 percent growth, supported by strong global demand for electrical and electronics products. Manufacturing and consumer-linked services drove expansion, while mining rebounded sharply on higher LNG and crude oil output. Agriculture moderated slightly, reflecting shifting policy priorities. Elsewhere, the picture darkened. The Philippines’ growth slowed to 4.0 percent, its weakest since 2021. Services momentum faded, industrial growth stalled, and agriculture suffered as typhoons disrupted harvests. Tariffs amplified existing vulnerabilities. Thailand’s slowdown was more severe. Growth fell to 1.2 percent, with tourism weakening, services slowing, and both manufacturing and construction contracting for the first time in 2025. Even strong electronics exports could not offset broader demand softness. Indonesia held steady at 5 percent, but warning signs mounted. Foreign direct investment fell 8.9 percent year-on-year, the steepest drop since early 2020, as tariff uncertainty and geopolitical risk dampened sentiment. Capital concentrated in strategic sectors such as mining and logistics, bypassing consumption-oriented industries. Singapore grew 4.2 percent, prompting an upward revision to its annual outlook. Yet non-oil domestic exports contracted unexpectedly as U.S. tariffs weighed heavily on shipments—one of the clearest illustrations of tariff transmission into real economic drag. The lesson was unmistakable: tariffs did not slow Southeast Asia uniformly—they sorted it. Agriculture in the Crosswinds In 2025, agriculture did not escape the crosscurrents of global economic turbulence—it absorbed them indirectly, persistently, and unevenly. While the majority of reciprocal tariffs and trade tensions initially targeted manufactured goods, their reverberations extended deep into the food and agri-allied sectors. Slower services growth, particularly in tourism, hospitality, and urban consumption hubs, dampened domestic food demand in several Southeast Asian markets. Investment pullbacks—especially in cold-chain infrastructure, warehousing, and logistics—delayed modernization efforts crucial for maintaining quality and export competitiveness. Even small fluctuations in fertiliser, pesticide, and seed import duties translated into meaningful input-cost volatility for farmers and processors, compressing margins at a time of rising energy and labour costs.Yet the sector demonstrated remarkable resilience in pockets, and the explanation lay less in national protective tariffs and more in regional trade architecture and integration. Frameworks such as RCEP, upgraded ASEAN bilateral agreements, and intra-Asian supply chain arrangements provided structural cushions. Vietnam and Malaysia, for example, leveraged RCEP preferences to maintain export momentum for rice, seafood, and processed foods even as U.S. and EU markets became less accessible. Compliance costs dropped, supply chains shortened, and SMEs gained access to large, tariff-preferential markets without negotiating separate bilateral agreements. In short, agriculture held up not because of border walls, but because trade corridors within the region were predictable, diversified, and embedded.Similarly, India’s experience highlighted the limits of unilateral tariff protection. Import duties on edible oils shielded domestic producers but raised costs for downstream food processors and livestock farmers, demonstrating that insulation alone cannot fully mitigate global shocks. Export-oriented commodities—rice, spices, coffee—flourished only where access to diversified overseas markets was available, from the Gulf and Africa to Asia, underscoring that trade resilience depends on integration, not isolation.The 2025 experience underscored a critical lesson: agriculture’s performance is structurally intertwined with trade networks, supply chain efficiency, and market diversification. Protective tariffs may provide temporary relief or political stability, but long-term resilience in a world of persistent trade shocks is built through regional frameworks, predictable rules, and strategic alignment, not through national walls. In this sense, agriculture in Asia was less a passive victim of global trade frictions than an adaptive system navigating the crosswinds through connectivity and institutional foresight. What 2025 Ultimately Changed 2025 Ultimately ChangedBy the end of 2025, three structural truths had crystallized across Asia’s agri-economy and broader trade landscape:First, tariffs are no longer episodic shocks—they are permanent instruments of economic strategy. What once appeared as sporadic trade friction became embedded in the calculus of production, investment, and supply-chain planning. U.S. reciprocal tariffs, China’s retaliatory levies, and selective import duties in India demonstrated that governments now treat border measures as tools to achieve geopolitical leverage, manage domestic constituencies, and signal strategic intent. Trade uncertainty is no longer a temporary phenomenon to hedge against—it is a structural feature of the new economic environment.Second, resilience comes not from insulation but from integration. Nations and sectors that relied on isolationist protectionism paid a cost. Conversely, economies leveraging regional frameworks, bilateral agreements, and adaptive supply chains buffered themselves from external shocks. RCEP-enabled flows, ASEAN intra-regional trade preferences, and India’s diversified export corridors to the Gulf, Africa, and Asia illustrate the principle: predictable, flexible, and diversified market access is more protective than any tariff wall. Resilience is increasingly measured in the ability to pivot supply chains quickly, reduce compliance complexity, and maintain volumes amid shifting global conditions.Third, agriculture can no longer be treated as a domestic policy silo. In 2025, farming, fisheries, fertilisers, and food processing were not merely economic sectors—they were instruments of diplomacy, leverage, and strategic signaling. Beijing used soy, dairy, and seafood flows as both bargaining chips and regional connectors. India balanced farmer protection with export credibility, shaping its trade posture to align domestic welfare with international market access. ASEAN producers relied on RCEP to preserve trade volumes, demonstrating that agricultural policy is inseparable from geopolitical and economic architecture.Taken together, these truths underscore a broader structural shift: Asia did not exit 2025 weaker—but it exited reordered. Growth favored economies combining industrial depth, trade agility, and policy clarity. Capital gravitated toward jurisdictions that offered certainty amid fragmentation. Agriculture, often the silent absorber of policy risk, became a barometer of strategic competence: who could maintain farm incomes, secure inputs, and sustain exports under layered tariff pressures became a marker of overall resilience.For investors, policymakers, and agribusinesses, the implications are profound. Predictability, diversification, and connectivity are no longer optional—they are core determinants of competitive advantage. Supply chains must be designed for agility, not just efficiency; trade corridors must be navigated as instruments of strategy, not as passive conduits.As 2026 approaches, one conclusion is unavoidable: in a world where tariffs are strategy, adaptability is destiny. Countries and firms that internalize this reality, leveraging integration rather than insulation, will capture growth, manage risk, and shape the contours of the next decade. Those that cling to old notions of protection or market complacency will find themselves exposed to the crosswinds of a permanently restructured global trade architecture.2025 was the year Asia recalibrated. The next decade will reveal who turned insight into advantage—and who became collateral in the era of tariffs as policy. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3490/asias-agri-tech-reckoning-why-2025-became-defining-year-for-farm-inputs.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3490/asias-agri-tech-reckoning-why-2025-became-defining-year-for-farm-inputs.html Tue, 23 Dec 2025 17:06:31 +0530 From AI-guided seeds in China to microbial fertilisers in Southeast Asia and desert farming systems in West Asia, 2025 marked the moment agricultural technology in Asia-Pacific stopped being experimental — and became strategic. In 2025, Asia-Pacific agriculture crossed a quiet but consequential threshold. For years, agri-tech across the region had been framed as a future promise: pilots, proofs of concept, donor-funded trials, and glossy demonstrations that rarely survived the realities of fragmented landholdings, thin rural credit, and conservative farmer behaviour. This year, that framing collapsed. Climate volatility sharpened, fertiliser geopolitics resurfaced, export markets hardened residue and traceability standards, and governments began treating agricultural inputs not as commodities but as strategic infrastructure. What followed was not a single revolution, but a region-wide realignment. Digital advisories became operational tools. Biologicals moved from fringe to necessity. Precision equipment shifted from ownership to service. Seeds re-entered geopolitical calculations. And data — once an afterthought — became a new battleground of trust. Asia’s agri-tech story in 2025 was not about who invented the smartest tool. It was about who made technology stick. From Pilot Projects to Production Systems In 2025, the most consequential change in Asia-Pacific agriculture did not arrive with a product launch or a funding round. It arrived quietly, through the disappearance of a word that had dominated agri-tech discourse for over a decade: pilot. For years, digital agriculture in Asia lived in perpetual trial mode. AI-driven advisories, satellite imagery, weather-linked pest alerts, and soil analytics were showcased at conferences, tested on demonstration plots, and praised in reports—yet rarely embedded into everyday farming decisions. In 2025, that cycle finally broke. Across India, China, Vietnam, and much of Southeast Asia, digital agri-inputs stopped being marketed as standalone apps or dashboards. Instead, they were absorbed into the institutional plumbing of agriculture—extension services, farmer producer organisations, agribusiness procurement systems, and government programmes. Technology no longer asked farmers to change their behaviour first; systems changed around them. India’s Digital Agriculture Mission crystallised this shift. The state moved away from promoting isolated tools and focused instead on decision integration. AI-based, hyper-local input recommendations began factoring in groundwater stress, rainfall volatility, soil health records, and price signals—transforming advisories from generic suggestions into actionable instructions. The platforms that scaled fastest were not those with the most sophisticated models, but those that bundled input guidance with credit access, assured input delivery, and market linkage. In a landscape dominated by smallholders, integration proved more valuable than innovation. China’s trajectory was markedly different—and deliberately so. Digital agriculture there evolved as an industrial system rather than a farmer service. On large state farms in Heilongjiang and Inner Mongolia, AI-guided fertilisation, autonomous tractors, and drone-based variable spraying were rolled out at scale. The goal was not incremental yield gains but radical input efficiency and labour substitution in a countryside grappling with demographic decline. In China’s model, digital inputs functioned less as advisory tools and more as instruments of operational discipline. Southeast Asia offered a third pathway. In Vietnam and Thailand, digital input systems became tightly linked to export compliance. Traceability requirements from European and Gulf markets forced agribusinesses to embed digital nutrient planning and pest forecasting into contract farming arrangements. Adoption followed not because farmers were convinced, but because market access depended on it. In South Asia’s poorer economies, necessity bred pragmatism. Nepal and Bangladesh leapfrogged capital-intensive models altogether, deploying mobile-first advisory systems that worked on basic phones and unreliable networks. These platforms compensated for weak mechanisation by optimising timing—when to plant, irrigate, fertilise, or protect crops—proving that digital agriculture could scale even where hardware could not. This transition marked the end of technology theatre in Asian agriculture. For the first time, digital tools stopped being optional add-ons that relied on farmer enthusiasm and became embedded decision infrastructure. Once input recommendations were wired into credit approval, procurement contracts, subsidy delivery, and extension workflows, adoption ceased to be voluntary. It became structural. That shift fundamentally altered the economics of agri-tech. Scaling no longer depended on persuading millions of individual farmers one by one. It depended on plugging into a handful of powerful systems—banks, buyers, cooperatives, and governments. The result was a dramatic acceleration in adoption speed, coverage, and consistency. More importantly, 2025 established a new rule for agri-tech success in Asia-Pacific: technology that does not integrate will not scale. The winners were not the smartest algorithms, but the ones that disappeared into the background—quietly shaping decisions, reducing risk, and making agriculture more governable in an increasingly volatile world. In that sense, 2025 did not make digital agriculture more visible.It made it unavoidable. The Year Chemistry Lost Its Monopoly: APAC Agri-Tech 2025 If 2025 had a defining theme in Asia-Pacific agriculture, it was integration under pressure. Across the region, digital advisories, biological inputs, and next-generation chemical technologies converged into system-level farm management platforms, reshaping how seeds were sown, nutrients applied, weeds controlled, and risks mitigated — from India’s vast paddy belts to China’s industrial grain corridors and Southeast Asia’s diversified cropping landscapes. The most visible shift was the quiet disappearance of the word pilot. Demonstration plots and experimental apps became operational infrastructure. AI-driven crop advisories, satellite-based nutrient planning, and weather-linked pest forecasts were embedded into extension services, credit pathways, and agribusiness procurement platforms. India’s Digital Agriculture Mission integrated hyper-local recommendations into government and cooperative systems; China’s Heilongjiang and Inner Mongolia state farms scaled autonomous machinery, drone-based spraying, and AI-guided fertilization; Nepal and Bangladesh leapfrogged hardware-heavy models with mobile-first advisory platforms. Digital tools moved from optional add-ons to decision infrastructure, shaping adoption speed and scale region-wide. Yet while technology transformed how inputs were applied, geopolitical developments reshaped what inputs were available. China, a dominant global supplier of nitrogenous and phosphate fertilizers, restricted exports of specialty fertilizers in 2025 to preserve domestic supply and support strategic industries such as battery production. For importers like India, this triggered an acute fertilizer crunch, spiking prices, straining subsidy programs, and forcing urgent diversification toward alternative sources in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. Analysts noted that these export controls functioned as a non-tariff trade lever, echoing prior Chinese tactics with rare earths and industrial chemicals. The disruption accelerated adoption of biologicals and precision digital tools, as microbial inoculants, bio-stimulants, and AI-driven nutrient optimization became essential to maintain crop performance under uncertain chemical supply. Biologicals themselves evolved from alternative inputs to core risk-management tools. In India, they became fiscal stabilizers, stretching subsidies while sustaining soil fertility. China embedded microbial inoculants into long-term soil health strategies. Vietnam and Thailand adopted biologicals to meet residue-compliant export requirements, while Indonesia and the Philippines embraced them to buffer climatic shocks. These products — ranging from China’s Neptunion biostimulant to the Philippines’ 7,200-MT biofertilizer facility producing nitrogen-fixing, phosphate-solubilizing, and mycorrhizal inoculants — addressed gaps that chemistry or digital advisories alone could not, enhancing soil microbiome health, nutrient cycling, and adaptive stress resilience. Chemical innovation, meanwhile, became more targeted and integrated. BASF’s Provisia Herbicide-Tolerant Rice System in China allowed precise herbicide use on tolerant varieties, reducing weed pressure without compromising integrated management. Japan’s Kumiai Chemical introduced EFFEEDA-based herbicides (TESSHIN, SEITEN, ISSEN) for paddy, while India saw a wave of crop-specific launches — Altair, Pyankor, Dinkar, Torry Super, Brucia, Ashitaka, Pixxaro, Centurion EZ, Melody Duo, Tag-Proxy, Tag Fly Gold — addressing weeds, pests, and fungal threats across paddy, maize, wheat, soybean, cotton, and horticulture. These innovations reflect a shift from blanket chemistry to precision intervention, complementing digital advisories and biological risk buffers. In sum, 2025 crystallized a fundamental transformation in Asia-Pacific agriculture: digital tools became embedded infrastructure; biologicals emerged as essential risk-management assets; and chemistry evolved into precision instruments integrated with AI and microbial strategies. The geopolitical fertilizer crunch accelerated this transition, demonstrating that when conventional inputs falter, a combination of technology and biology can sustain productivity, profitability, and resilience. 2025 was the year chemistry lost its monopoly, digital intelligence gained operational dominance, and biologicals became indispensable, establishing the blueprint for Asia-Pacific agriculture in the decade ahead. Precision Agriculture: Scale Still Wins In 2025, precision agriculture proved its value — but it also laid bare a structural truth: scale still dictates adoption unless delivery models evolve. Across the Asia‑Pacific, regions with expansive, consolidated farms pushed precision tools into operational use. In Australia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan, satellite‑guided fertilisation, AI‑based yield mapping, and variable‑rate application systems became standard in broadacre cereal and oilseed landscapes. China’s state farms blended autonomous tractors, robotic sprayers, and fleet‑wide AI decision engines to squeeze every unit of input for maximum efficiency. Malaysia’s oil palm sector emerged as one of the region’s most advanced applications, where integrated sensor networks and drone scouting optimized nutrition and protection regimes across tens of thousands of hectares. The technology landscape confirms this trajectory. Asia‑Pacific’s agri‑drones market alone — a key precision agriculture proxy — was valued at approximately $1.4 billion in 2025 and is projected to grow sharply through the decade, driven by crop monitoring, adaptive spraying, and IoT‑connected data systems that support real‑time decision‑making and labor substitution. Remote sensing, satellite imagery, and AI‑enhanced variable‑rate fertiliser application technologies reported estimated adoption rates above 55  per cent among modern commercial growers by 2025, supporting nutrient savings of up to 20‑25  per cent and yield uplifts in the mid‑teens.  But smallholder Asia told a different story. Precision agriculture’s capital intensity — GPS‑enabled machinery, sensors, and automated implements — remains a barrier for fragmented landholding systems where average farm sizes are often below two hectares. Empirical data shows that among smallholders globally, adoption of GPS‑guided systems rarely exceeds the low double digits, with variable‑rate technologies and remote sensing trailing even further. Investments in a $5,000–$20,000 technology stack can delay return on investment beyond a single cropping cycle in low‑margin systems, dampening farmer demand.  In this environment, precision agriculture succeeded only when delivered as a service. Drone spraying, soil health testing, and nutrient diagnostics increasingly appeared as on‑demand utilities rather than assets to be bought outright. Contract service providers and Agri‑Tech‑as‑a‑Service (Agri‑TaaS) models allowed even midsized farms to access variable‑rate application maps, crop health indices, and UAV‑enabled scouting without the upfront capital burden. Emerging Drone‑as‑a‑Service models — where operators lease UAV capabilities at daily or seasonal rates — have proliferated, making precision spraying and data capture accessible to farmers who would otherwise never own the hardware.  2025 shattered the myth that precision agriculture naturally democratizes farming. Instead, it demonstrated that precision follows scale unless proactively redesigned for fragmentation. Large farms could absorb the cost and complexity, turning precision tools into economic levers. Smallholder regions, by contrast, only saw tangible benefits through service‑based delivery, where expertise, hardware, and analytics were pooled and shared. This realization forced companies and governments to rethink precision adoption strategies — from hardware sales to service ecosystems, from one‑off subsidies to sustainable subscription models. It underscored a critical insight: technology delivery must match farm structure, not farm size, and only then can precision agriculture truly bridge the divide between commercial estates and smallholder fields. In 2025, precision agriculture did not flatten Asia’s farm landscape — but it did reshape the model of delivery, setting the stage for broader inclusion and impact in the decade ahead. Seeds Return to the Geopolitical Arena While digital tools, biologicals, and chemical innovations dominated public attention, the most strategic transformation of 2025 quietly unfolded beneath the soil. Seeds — long treated as commercial commodities — returned to the geopolitical stage, framed explicitly as instruments of national resilience and sovereignty. China accelerated gene-edited crop programs and AI-driven breeding platforms, prioritizing wheat, rice, and maize varieties that could sustain production under erratic rainfall, rising temperatures, and constrained fertilizer access. Beijing’s investments were not only productivity-focused; they aimed to consolidate control over proprietary genetics, establishing seed systems as national strategic assets and reducing dependency on global germplasm flows. India, in parallel, expanded climate-resilient breeding partnerships, leveraging both public-private collaborations and international research networks to develop drought-tolerant rice and heat-resilient wheat varieties. State-led initiatives, such as ICAR’s accelerated trial programs, focused on integrating CRISPR-enabled traits and conventional breeding to safeguard staple crops against climate extremes. In Pakistan and Bangladesh, national breeding priorities concentrated on salt- and heat-tolerant rice and wheat, reflecting acute vulnerability in delta and arid regions. Bangladesh’s recently expanded saline-tolerant rice trials, covering over 15,000 hectares in the coastal belt, exemplified a shift from yield-maximization to risk hedging. Similarly, Pakistan invested in early-maturing, heat-resilient wheat varieties to buffer against both climatic shocks and export volatility. Central Asian states — particularly Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan — poured resources into drought-hardy wheat and cotton genetics, ensuring stable export flows for regional markets heavily dependent on staple and fiber crops. AI-assisted selection and marker-assisted breeding accelerated cycles, compressing what once took a decade into 3–4 years of development. Even Southeast Asia and West Asia joined the trend: Vietnam prioritized flood-tolerant rice, Thailand expanded stress-resilient cassava, and Israel continued deploying precision breeding and controlled-environment trials to secure strategic horticultural crops. 2025 crystallized a fundamental shift: seeds re-emerged as long-term strategic infrastructure, not just inputs for yield maximization. In a world increasingly defined by climate volatility, geopolitical tensions, and trade uncertainties, genetic control became as important as productivity. Nations recognized that access to proprietary germplasm, rapid breeding capabilities, and AI-driven selection systems could safeguard food security, export stability, and economic sovereignty. The era of agri-input sovereignty — with seeds at its core — was no longer theoretical. 2025 marked the year when national strategies explicitly treated seed systems as instruments of resilience and leverage, signaling a profound recalibration of priorities across Asia-Pacific and beyond. West Asia: When Inputs Became National Security Nowhere was the strategic turn sharper than in West Asia. Israel continued exporting agricultural intelligence — irrigation algorithms, fertigation software, microbial platforms — embedding itself deeply into global food systems. Saudi Arabia scaled controlled-environment agriculture, saline-tolerant inputs, and AI irrigation as part of food security policy. Iraq focused on seed reform and digital planning to stabilise yields amid water scarcity. West Asia reframed agri-inputs as resilience infrastructure, not farm tools. This logic — agriculture as national security — is increasingly influencing Asia’s food policy debates, especially in water-stressed and import-dependent economies. The Barriers That Refused to Move Despite the rapid advance of digital advisories, biological inputs, and precision tools in 2025, three deep structural constraints remained stubbornly persistent — finance, fragmentation, and trust — limiting the pace and breadth of transformation in Asian agriculture. Finance Still Lags Behind Technology Across low‑ and middle‑income countries in the region, the gap between available technology and farmers’ ability to pay for it remained wide in 2025. Modern agri‑tech tools — from AI decision platforms to drones and multispectral sensors — carry high upfront costs that many smallholders simply cannot absorb. Studies as recent as 2025 indicate that financial constraints topped the list of barriers to technology adoption: high initial investments and limited access to credit or tailored financial products prevented farmers from experimenting with or fully deploying new tools. Lack of affordable, green lines of credit and risk‑sharing mechanisms further limited uptake, especially among cash‑constrained smallholders whose income fluctuates with seasonality and market price swings.  Even where financing exists, its structure often fails to match agricultural realities. Traditional bank loans require collateral that small farms rarely possess, and microfinance remains too limited to bridge the financing gap for digital and precision investments. In ASEAN economies, only a minority of rural producers reported receiving technical or capital assistance, underscoring how inadequate financing mechanisms continue to constrain adoption of even well‑proven technologies.  Fragmentation Defied Standardisation Fragmentation — of data, platforms, and institutional coordination — was another barrier that refused to budge in 2025. Asia-Pacific agriculture is characterised by enormous diversity in farm size, cropping systems, languages, and governance frameworks, and no unified data or regulatory architecture exists to harmonise digital tools across these contexts. Despite strong digital penetration in some countries, fragmented data ecosystems with inconsistent standards, limited interoperability, and little consensus on privacy and governance hindered scale. In markets like India, for example, multiple siloed databases across government agencies, startups, and cooperatives limited integration of advisory, finance, and market services into a seamless farmer experience.  In the ASEAN region, national policy frameworks often referenced digitalisation goals without converting them into operational roadmaps — leading to patchy deployment of IoT, blockchain, and traceability systems, and uneven delivery of digital agri‑services. Physical infrastructure fragmentation — from inconsistent broadband to underdeveloped logistics — compounded digital silos, making it difficult for solutions that worked well in one state or village to be replicated or interoperable in another.  Trust Limited Platform Reach Technology adoption in 2025 did not fail for want of innovation — it failed where trust and legitimacy were absent. Farmers rarely adopted new tools simply because they were available. They adopted them through relationships — with cooperatives, extension agents, input suppliers, and trusted peers — not through dashboards or automated alerts. For many smallholders, the risk of incorrect recommendations, questionable data privacy, or a bad investment outweighed anticipated benefits. In some surveys, farmers expressed concern about data misuse and unclear consent protocols, deterring them from sharing field data with digital platforms.  A deeper limitation was the lack of localized validation. When technologies did not demonstrably reflect local conditions — soil types, climate patterns, pests, or market access — farmers treated them with scepticism. Adoption rates in low‑trust settings remained low even when technologies were technically sound, reflecting a broader behavioural and cultural dimension of adoption that purely technical solutions cannot address. These barriers explain why innovation alone cannot transform Asian agriculture — even in a breakthrough year like 2025. While digital tools, biological inputs, and precision systems offered tangible productivity and resilience gains, their real‑world uptake was determined less by sophistication than by institutional design, economic fit, and social legitimacy. Finance mattered because without accessible, risk‑aligned capital, even proven technologies remained out of reach for most farmers. Fragmentation mattered because disconnected data and policy systems impeded coherent delivery and scale. Trust mattered because adoption depended on relationships, not algorithms, and farmers gravitated toward recommendations backed by human networks, peer verification, and clear economic outcomes. In other words, adoption followed institutional design before it followed technological capability — a lesson that is reshaping how agri‑tech is financed, regulated, deployed, and scaled across Asia‑Pacific. Developing solutions that align with farmers’ cash flows, harmonise across fragmented systems, and are anchored in trusted networks will be as important as the next breakthrough in AI, drones, or biological inputs. What 2025 Really Changed The importance of 2025 lies in alignment- Technology aligned with climate reality.Inputs aligned with export economics.Digital tools aligned with policy architecture.Biologicals aligned with soil exhaustion.Precision aligned with labour scarcity. Agri-tech in Asia-Pacific is no longer chasing novelty. It is chasing durability. The next phase will not be won by those who invent fastest, but by those who integrate best — across inputs, data, finance, and markets. In a region that feeds more than half the world, the future of food will not be decided in laboratories alone. It will be decided by who controls the systems that make technologies endure. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3484/this-is-not-dumping-this-is-demand-inside-indias-rice-trade-reality-as-u-s-tariffs-surge.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3484/this-is-not-dumping-this-is-demand-inside-indias-rice-trade-reality-as-u-s-tariffs-surge.html Fri, 19 Dec 2025 13:16:45 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Dev Garg, Vice President of the Indian Rice Exporters Federation (IREF), pushes back against U.S. allegations of dumping as tariffs on Indian rice rise sharply, asserting that India’s exports are fundamentally demand-driven, not subsidy-fueled. Garg explains that Indian basmati and select non-basmati varieties cater to distinct cultural and culinary segments in the U.S., making them non-substitutable by domestically grown American rice. He notes that despite tariffs increasing from 10 per cent to 50 per cent, demand has remained resilient, with higher costs largely absorbed by U.S. consumers due to basmati’s irreplaceable qualities and relatively low household consumption volumes. He highlights India’s structural advantages—varietal depth, ageing practices, and advanced milling infrastructure—which continue to anchor its global competitiveness. Looking ahead, Garg outlines IREF’s strategy of market diversification, value-added exports, and policy support in Budget 2026 to future-proof India’s rice export ecosystem against geopolitical and trade shocks. The U.S. President’s recent comments have brought Indo–U.S. rice trade into global focus. From IREF’s perspective, what are the biggest misconceptions that need correction regarding Indian rice exports to the United States ?The first and most fundamental misconception is the allegation of dumping. Indian rice exports to the United States are entirely demand-driven, not supply-pushed. Exporters ship rice only against confirmed orders from U.S. importers, retailers, and distributors. There is no scenario in which rice is “offloaded” into the U.S. market to suppress prices.The second misconception is that Indian rice competes directly with U.S.-grown rice. That assumption ignores basic market realities. Indian rice—especially basmati and select non-basmati varieties—serves a completely different consumer base, rooted in cultural, ethnic, and culinary preferences. U.S. rice is predominantly medium- and short-grain, designed for entirely different cooking applications. These are not interchangeable products.Finally, the MSP argument is deeply misunderstood. The U.S. has raised concerns around MSP-linked varieties such as PR-106 and IR-64. But Sona Masuri and basmati—India’s principal exports to the U.S.—do not fall under MSP at all. To suggest that MSP is distorting the U.S. market is simply incorrect.Despite tariffs rising sharply from 10 per cent to 50 per cent, Indian rice exports to the U.S. have continued. What explains this sustained demand, and how are U.S. consumers responding to higher retail prices ?The resilience of demand comes down to irreplaceability.Basmati rice is not a commodity; it is a culinary necessity for specific cuisines. The aroma, elongation, texture, and cooking behavior of Indian basmati—particularly for dishes like biryani—cannot be substituted. Even Pakistani basmati, often cited as an alternative, differs significantly in colour palette, taste profile, and ageing characteristics.India also has a strategic advantage in varietal depth. When tariffs rise, exporters can shift demand toward alternative Indian basmati varieties. For example, Pusa Basmati 1121 may be premium-priced, but newer varieties like PB-1718 or PB-1509 allow exporters to offer value options without compromising on authenticity. More recently, PB-21 (II-21) has emerged as a premium export variety, roughly priced around $ 1,000 per metric tonne, giving the market flexibility across price points.Crucially, the entire tariff burden is borne by U.S. consumers, not Indian exporters. But rice consumption volumes in the U.S. are relatively small—typically 5 kg per household annually. Given the high per capita income levels in the U.S., the absolute increase in household food expenditure is marginal. Consumers absorb the price increase without materially altering consumption behavior.Indian basmati and non-basmati rice cater to specific cultural and culinary segments in the U.S. How critical are these segments to long-term demand, and do you foresee any shifts in consumption patterns ?These segments are not niche anymore—they are structural. Indian food has become one of the most popular global cuisines, and the U.S. is no exception. The rise of Indian restaurants, ready-to-cook meal kits, ethnic food aisles in mainstream retail, and cross-cultural adoption of Indian cooking at home is driving sustained growth in basmati demand.From IREF’s perspective, the long-term trajectory is clearly upward. Basmati consumption in the U.S. is increasing not just among the Indian diaspora, but among mainstream consumers who associate it with premium quality, health, and superior taste. This is not a cyclical trend—it is a cultural shift.You mentioned that the tariff burden is largely passed on to U.S. consumers. What impact has this had on Indian exporters, millers, and farmers? Has it affected export realisations or supply-chain planning ? At present, Indian exporters remain largely insulated.There was a window of nearly one month between the announcement and implementation of the higher tariff. During this period, exporters front-loaded shipments into the U.S., ensuring continuity of supply. As a result, there has been no disruption to export flows, no inventory overhang, and no adverse impact on farm-gate prices.From a planning perspective, Indian rice exports are continuing as normal. Milling operations, procurement cycles, and shipping schedules remain intact. There is no evidence of stress transmission from U.S. tariff policy back to Indian farmers or millers at this stage.Given that U.S.-grown rice is not a like-for-like substitute for Indian basmati, how does this quality and culinary differentiation strengthen India’s competitive position globally ?India’s competitive advantage lies in quality, ageing, and processing sophistication.Indian exporters have a long-standing practice of supplying aged rice. Much like wine, rice improves with age—its cooking properties, aroma, and grain integrity enhance over time. This gives Indian rice a superior culinary experience compared to fresher alternatives from competing origins.Additionally, India’s milling infrastructure is significantly more advanced than many competing exporters, including Pakistan. Indian mills deliver consistent grain length, polish, and breakage control at scale. This consistency is critical for global buyers and foodservice chains.As a result, Indian rice is not just prevalent—it is becoming the reference standard in many global markets.Looking ahead, how is IREF working with the Government of India to diversify markets, mitigate tariff-related risks, and ensure stable growth for India’s rice export ecosystem ?Market diversification is a central pillar of IREF’s strategy.We have identified 26 high-potential international markets where competitors currently dominate rice consumption. The cumulative market opportunity across these geographies is estimated at Rs 1.8 lakh crore. These countries already import rice—it is simply sourced from non-Indian origins.Our approach is not generic. Countries like Japan, for example, are extremely particular about food quality. Sushi rice has specific textural requirements. IREF has identified Indian varieties—such as Nagri Dubraj, a GI-tagged rice from Chhattisgarh—that can technically and sensorially replace the rice currently used in sushi preparation.Beyond trade negotiations, large international events and food festivals are increasingly being used as export-promotion platforms. The goal is to demonstrate functional equivalence—or superiority—of Indian varieties in global cuisines.What recommendations would IREF like to see reflected in the Union Budget 2026 ?There are three clear priorities.First, an interest subvention scheme for rice exporters. Export financing costs in India remain high, and easing this burden would immediately improve competitiveness.Second, targeted incentives for setting up modern rice mills, especially those focused on value-added processing, ageing infrastructure, and export-grade packaging.Third, enhancing the existing export incentive framework from 0.9 per cent to around 3 per cent, coupled with a strong focus on export infrastructure—ports, logistics, and quality certification systems.These measures would not only strengthen exports but also future-proof India’s rice ecosystem against geopolitical and tariff-related shocks.Closing ThoughtAs the global trade narrative grows louder, IREF’s message is clear: India’s rice exports are not a distortion—they are a response to demand, culture, and culinary preference. Tariffs may rise, rhetoric may sharpen, but as long as food remains deeply tied to identity and taste, India’s rice will continue to travel the world—grain by grain, market by market. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3483/from-ecological-fit-to-economic-proof-botswanas-safflower-strategy-redefines-dryland-resilience.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3483/from-ecological-fit-to-economic-proof-botswanas-safflower-strategy-redefines-dryland-resilience.html Fri, 19 Dec 2025 13:08:51 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Nnyaladzi Madzikigwa, Author and Director of Saffenergy Initiatives, Botswana, explains why safflower is emerging as a strategic resilience crop rather than a speculative diversification bet. Nnyaladzi argues that safflower’s real advantage lies in income stability, low input dependence, and multi-stream value creation—qualities that make it economically superior to high-yield but volatile dryland staples under climate stress. By rejecting bulk commodity markets and anchoring safflower in cooperative-owned processing, traceability, and ethical origin branding, Botswana is positioning the crop as an identity-based export for nutraceutical, cosmetic, and wellness markets. Crucially, the model integrates biodiversity stewardship, women- and youth-led ownership, and GBV-responsive livelihoods, reframing safflower not merely as an agronomic intervention but as a national strategy for climate resilience, social recovery, and rural economic sovereignty. From Ecological Fit to Economic Proof Botswana’s ecosystems have long demonstrated resilience under climatic stress—but resilience alone does not attract capital. What hard economic evidence (yield stability, cost curves, margin resilience) can demonstrate that safflower is not just climate-compatible, but commercially superior to traditional dryland staples under Botswana’s conditions ? Saffenergy Initiatives frames safflower not as a speculative diversification experiment, but as a deliberately chosen economic resilience instrument suited to Botswana’s dryland realities. Under arid and semi-arid conditions, the crop offers a rare combination of yield stability, low input intensity, and diversified revenue potential. Unlike traditional dryland staples that swing sharply with rainfall variability, safflower delivers predictable output even in stressed seasons. Its modest water, fertiliser, and pesticide requirements reduce production risk and protect farmer margins when climate shocks hit. Crucially, safflower’s value does not rest solely on seed yields: oil, cake, petals, and secondary by-products create multiple income streams. In cooperative pilots where safflower is integrated with poultry and mixed farming systems, household income volatility has fallen sharply. For Saffenergy, this stability—rather than peak agronomic performance—is what makes safflower economically compelling in Botswana’s climate context. Avoiding the Commodity Trap Many climate-resilient crops fail because they enter global markets as low-value commodities. How will Botswana position safflower not as another bulk oilseed, but as a differentiated, biodiversity-anchored product capable of sustaining premium pricing in global nutraceutical, cosmetic, and wellness markets? The strategy, Saffenergy argues, is to refuse participation in bulk oilseed markets altogether. Botswana’s opportunity lies in differentiation, not scale. Safflower is being positioned outside commodity pricing dynamics and anchored instead in biodiversity, climate resilience, and ethical production, including links to GBV recovery and livelihood reintegration programmes. The target markets are nutraceuticals, cosmetics, and wellness—segments where traceability, provenance, and ethical sourcing command premiums. By combining low-input dryland cultivation with cooperative-led traceability, social impact certification, and origin branding tied to ecosystem stewardship, Botswana safflower is repositioned from a price-taking commodity into an identity-based product. In this model, value is protected by trust and narrative, not by volume. Value Addition vs. Value Capture Local processing often creates jobs—but not necessarily wealth—if branding, IP, and market access remain offshore. Which segments of the safflower value chain (processing, formulation, branding, certification, IP) must remain in Botswana to ensure that rural communities capture value rather than merely supply raw inputs ? For communities to capture wealth rather than wages, Saffenergy insists that critical nodes of the value chain must remain in Botswana. These include primary processing such as oil pressing and cake production, downstream formulation for cosmetics, wellness blends, and animal feed, ownership of certification and traceability systems, brand control and storytelling, and intellectual property linked to formulations and indigenous knowledge. At Saffenergy, these functions are cooperative-owned by design. Export partners may handle distribution, but product identity, narrative authority, and margin capture remain local. This approach is not ideological, the organisation argues, but structural: Without control over these nodes, rural economies default to extractive models regardless of crop choice. Cooperatives as Export Vehicles, Not Welfare Structures Cooperatives frequently struggle with governance, quality control, and market discipline.What institutional design—governance rules, professional management, digital traceability, performance incentives—will allow Botswana’s safflower cooperatives to function as export-grade enterprises rather than subsistence collectives? Saffenergy’s answer is to design cooperatives as enterprises first and social instruments second. This means professional management rather than volunteer leadership, performance-linked incentives tied to quality and delivery, digital traceability from field to market, contractually enforced quality protocols, and a clear separation between social and commercial accounting. GBV and psychosocial support programmes operate alongside the cooperative, not within its governance framework, ensuring that empathy does not dilute market discipline. Export markets reward consistency and reliability, Saffenergy notes, and welfare logic cannot substitute for enterprise rigor. Competing in a Crowded Climate-Smart World Countries such as India, Ethiopia, and Kenya are already advancing biodiversity-linked crops into global markets. What is Botswana’s unique competitive moat—ecological, reputational, regulatory, or branding-based—that prevents safflower from becoming a race to the bottom on price? Botswana’s advantage, according to Saffenergy, is credibility rather than scale. The country brings a global reputation for good governance, clean landscapes with low chemical intensity, high trust in regulatory systems, and a compelling ethical production narrative. When these attributes are combined with biodiversity stewardship and GBV-responsive rural development, safflower becomes more than a crop—it becomes a trusted origin. That trust underpins premium pricing and shields producers from the race-to-the-bottom dynamics that have hollowed out many commodity sectors. Scaling Without Ecological Degradation History shows that scaling “green” crops can unintentionally replicate extractive agricultural models.How will Botswana ensure that safflower expansion strengthens soil health, water efficiency, and biodiversity rather than simplifying landscapes and recreating monoculture risks? Scaling, Saffenergy emphasises, does not mean monoculture expansion. Safflower’s resilience allows growth without ecological overreach when embedded within integrated farming systems, crop rotation regimes that regenerate soils, water-efficient dryland irrigation practices, and intercropping and fallow restoration strategies. Because income is diversified across by-products and poultry integration, farmers are not pressured to continuously expand acreage. In this model, ecological health is treated as an economic asset rather than an externality to be managed after the fact. Gender, Youth, and the Political Economy of Rural Jobs Rural agro-enterprises often promise inclusion but deliver uneven outcomes. How will safflower-based rural industries be structured to ensure meaningful participation and income security for women and youth—beyond seasonal labor or informal processing roles? Women and youth inclusion is positioned as central rather than ancillary. Saffenergy’s GBV-focused social programme provides psychosocial support for survivors, reintegration pathways into productive livelihoods, and skills training directly linked to income streams. Women and youth participate as cooperative shareholders, operators of processing units, and entrepreneurs in poultry and by-product enterprises. The emphasis is on continuous, year-round income rather than seasonal labour, with ownership replacing dependency. Economic agency, Saffenergy argues, is among the most effective tools for both GBV prevention and recovery. From Pilot Crop to National Strategy Many promising crops remain trapped in pilot mode due to fragmented policy support. What specific policy levers—procurement incentives, export facilitation, blended finance, certification subsidies—must Botswana activate to move safflower from a niche biodiversity project to a nationally scalable export strategy? To transition safflower from pilot projects to a national strategy, Saffenergy identifies five policy levers: public procurement of safflower oil and by-products, blended finance for rural processing hubs, certification subsidies for cooperatives, export facilitation for niche biodiversity products, and formal recognition of biodiversity crops within national agricultural policy. Above all, safflower must be framed not as a narrow crop intervention, but as a climate resilience, gender inclusion, and rural stability strategy. In Saffenergy’s framing, safflower is ultimately not just about farming—it is about restoring dignity, rebuilding resilience after trauma, and creating rural economies capable of healing both people and land. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3482/abs-reform-is-missing-link-in-indias-plant-based-innovation-story.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3482/abs-reform-is-missing-link-in-indias-plant-based-innovation-story.html Tue, 16 Dec 2025 10:15:13 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Sanjaya Mariwala, Executive Chairman and Managing Director of OmniActive Health Technologies, argues that India’s Biodiversity Act is quietly evolving from a policing statute into a potential industrial policy lever for plant-based innovation. He credits the 2023 amendments for easing compliance, aligning approvals with innovation cycles, and legitimising cultivated crops and traditional knowledge—but warns that fragmented state-level ABS practices still deter scale and global investment. Mariwala makes the case for a national ABS code, digital single-window compliance, and reward-linked reductions for companies investing in cultivation and conservation, shifting biodiversity from a cost centre to a competitive advantage. On R&D, he stresses that clarity on Digital Sequence Information, uniform research exemptions, and shared biofoundries are essential if India is to replicate its pharma success in botanicals, nutraceuticals, and functional ingredients. His message is blunt: Without predictable regulation, traceable supply chains, and incentives for value addition, India risks remaining a raw-material supplier even as rivals like Brazil and Thailand race ahead in the global bioeconomy. Biodiversity Act as an Industrial Policy Tool Can the Biodiversity Act evolve from a compliance framework into an enabling policy that accelerates India’s plant-based sectors—nutraceuticals, botanicals, plant proteins, phytopharma, and bio-based materials? What key amendments or guidelines would catalyse this shift? It is already moving in this direction, but the process needs further refinement. The Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023, brought about three important structural changes. First, it began with the removal of punitive measures and their replacement with financial penalties ranging from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 50 lakh. This change reshapes the act from a deterrence perspective to one of compliance. Second, it introduced key exemptions for cultivated crops, for codified traditional knowledge, and for AYUSH practitioners. These exemptions are designed to encourage domestic innovation and legitimise traditional practices without administrative overreach. Third, it aligned the Act with innovation cycles by requiring NBA approval before the grant of IPR, not before filing. This allows Indian entities to file patents without bureaucratic delays, while foreign applicants still require prior approval. However, the real bottleneck is state-level variability. With 8,610 licensed herbal manufacturing units operating across India, differences in interpretation across State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) create regulatory unpredictability, especially where ABS is determined case-by-case or increased for “high economic value” species. To convert the Act into an industrial accelerator, India needs: A national ABS code with fixed, uniform rates A digital single-window platform (the proposed Biodiversity Compliance Exchange) to bring transparency, standard timelines, and predictable costs A reward-linked model where companies investing in cultivation and conservation receive measurable ABS reductions This is how the Act can shift from policing to enabling, but only if stakeholders demand a unified national ABS code, transparent compliance systems, and active reward mechanisms for conservation investments. It is time for industry, government, and researchers to work together and advocate for these changes. De-risking R&D for Plant-Based Innovation India’s botanical R&D pipeline is modest compared to its biodiversity. What national policies—DSI guidelines, standardised approvals, research exemptions, shared biofoundries—could unlock world-scale innovation in plant-based actives and functional ingredients? Three elements matter in R&D: access, clarity, and infrastructure. The 2025 Biological Diversity Regulations recognise Digital Sequence Information (DSI) as a "biological resource", but importantly, they exempt academic research from benefit-sharing, ensuring fundamental science is not disrupted. This clarity is essential because genomic and metabolomic research are the backbone of new plant-derived actives. The Act also provides research exemptions for non-commercial bio surveys and academic studies, but these must be made uniformly applicable across all states to avoid uncertainty for institutions and startups. The next step is shared infrastructure. There is a need for bio-conservatories, seed banks, biosafety labs, shared bio foundries, and pilot-scale bioprocessing facilities. These are critical for SMEs, which often cannot afford large-scale fermentation units or botanical extraction facilities on their own. India’s pharmaceutical capabilities demonstrate what coordinated R&D ecosystems can achieve. India already produces one-third of the world’s pills and over 65 per cent of global vaccines. A similar ecosystem for plant-based actives supported by predictable access, rapid approvals and shared facilities can unlock world-scale innovation. Cultivation Over Extraction: A Policy Turning Point India still depends heavily on wild-sourced plants. What policy levers—contract farming incentives, carbon-linked subsidies, insurance schemes, guaranteed buyback mechanisms—can accelerate the shift to regenerative, large-scale cultivation of medicinal, aromatic, and functional crops? The Act now provides a strong policy foundation. Cultivated biological resources are exempt from ABS, which makes formal cultivation far more attractive than wild collection for industry players. The next step is to incentivise cultivation through: Contract farming for medicinal and aromatic plants Guaranteed buyback arrangements to reduce farmer risk Crop insurance schemes tailored to high-value species Carbon-linked incentives, since sustainable cultivation can generate biodiversity and carbon credits that reduce financing costs It all hinges upon the following completely transformative idea: The provision of a reduction in ABS in accordance with substantiated farming and ex-situ conservation. An enterprise that invests in farming threatened species under section 38 of the Act should be able to reduce its ABS burden. This also applies to any cultivated crop. Every project should be linked to development investment by every enterprise in contract cultivation. This will establish a positive feedback loop where investing in conservation makes economic sense rather than merely being a compliance activity. We already have a proof of concept. The experience of the Kani tribe—where benefit-sharing for the Jeevani formulation ensured local protection of the resource—shows that conservation thrives when incentives align with community and industry interests. Moving cultivation to the centre is not only sound environmental policy but also essential for long-term supply security. Stakeholders must now push for targeted incentives, drive investment in regenerative practices, and ensure that policy reforms prioritise large-scale, sustainable cultivation as the future of India's plant-based industry. ABS Designed for Scale, Not Stasis Non-uniform ABS fees and multi-layer approvals discourage industry investment. Should India adopt a national ABS code with fixed rates and digital processing to make compliance predictable and attractive for plant-based companies? The need for scale arises based on the predictability that comes with it. Currently, there are discrepancies in ABS evaluations across the states, leading to what can be perceived as “regulatory arbitrage” where companies can shift operations based on jurisdictional leniency or clarity. The 2025 Regulations begin with the proper framework in terms of fixed slabs of ABS based on turnover (0.2 per cent to 0.6 per cent in the case of large assessees) and exemptions up to turnover of Rs 5 crore. Although such a framework works well, there needs to be uniformity nationwide. It will remove any scope for subjective interpretation and ensure low-risk compliance by MSMEs. Otherwise, India will continue to demonstrate “world-class” intention but lackadaisical execution. It will continue to confuse the global fraternity as to whether it has the “capability” or “systems” in place. Global Competitiveness: India vs. Brazil, Vietnam, Thailand Competitor nations are aggressively scaling plant-based bioindustries. What policy steps are essential for India to compete in high-growth segments like curcumin, ashwagandha, moringa, plant proteins, and natural colours—beyond raw material exports? Three areas require immediate attention. First, cluster-based development: One model that India can follow to reduce the issues related to domestic manufacture and distribution is the “BCG model” in the Thai market, where there are clusters developed based on the region that specialises in a certain kind of crop or bioindustry. These clusters can include turmeric in Karnataka, ashwagandha in Rajasthan, or moringa in Tamil Nadu. The formation of these clusters requires research on the market potential of each product. This work must be undertaken jointly by the Ministry of AYUSH, the Ministry of Food Processing, and the Ministry of Commerce. Each cluster could have three to four crops and a primary processing industry. Second, value-added exports: It is important that India moves ahead in the global trade from raw botanical supplies to traceable, scientifically attested, and standardised ingredients. The Indian nutraceutical industry already employs over 3 million people and utilises close to a thousand botanical plant species, but most exports are in raw or less-processed form. To incentivise higher value addition, the ABS system should be structured so that basic commodity exporters pay the highest ABS, with the levy decreasing progressively as the level of value addition increases. Third, global compliance readiness: Import rules under the European Union require verification that plant-based goods are deforestation-free and geolocation-tagged to confirm their origin.  If we want to encourage exports, we need to align our local rules to meet the needs of such regulations being formed across major markets. This responsibility again rests with the Ministry of Commerce. Our interests in such a case would be best served if FTAs incorporate provisions that allow negotiation of these regulatory obligations as part of the agreement. The supply chains in India need traceability and GPS-tagged farm data, as well as sustainability certifications, in order to maintain competitiveness in exports. In other words, achieving these three changes will help India shift from being a large raw material provider to becoming an innovation hub in high-value plants. Reimagining Community Participation in Value Creation How can India move beyond transactional ABS payouts to truly participatory models—community-owned plantations, co-operative extraction units, shared IP rights—that make local communities' economic partners in the rise of the plant-based bioeconomy? India’s biodiversity prosperity depends heavily on the communities that live closest to it. Instead of transactional ABS payments, participation should be embedded into value chains. The next step is to incentivise cultivation through: Community-owned plantations and cooperatives,especially for species that require careful stewardship Co-managed extraction units, where communities run primary processing supported by industry partners Shared IP rights, following global models where indigenous communities become co-owners in patents when traditional knowledge is involved Community Protocols, enabling communities to set terms of access for biological resources and knowledge Reverse ABS structure, which imposes higher rates on low value-added exports and lowered or no ABS on higher value exports, should be the regime to be established. Building Trusted, Traceable, Export-Ready Value Chains Global buyers demand traceability, residue-free cultivation, and proof of conservation outcomes. What regulatory upgrades—digital traceability mandates, bioresource certification, ESG-linked incentives—are required for India to secure premium export markets? Traceability has emerged as the need of the hour. The Deforestation Regulation in the European Union makes it mandatory for importers to submit geolocation data regarding all farms in the supply chain, causing a shift in trade equations. India needs three regulatory upgrades: Digital traceability mandates using GPS-tagged farm plots, blockchain-based sourcing logs and integrated systems linked to APEDA export portals. National bioresource certification standards are aligned with global due diligence requirements. ESG-linked incentives reward residue-free cultivation and regenerative agriculture. We already have a strong precedent: India’s pharmaceutical export ecosystem meets stringent global standards. The same level of traceability and compliance needs to follow botanical, nutraceutical, and plant-based ingredients. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3464/states-expand-snap-federal-taxpayers-pay-price-cato-economist-flags-deep-structural-flaws.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3464/states-expand-snap-federal-taxpayers-pay-price-cato-economist-flags-deep-structural-flaws.html Wed, 10 Dec 2025 11:43:10 +0530 In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Romina Boccia, Director of Budget and Entitlement Policy at the Cato Institute, reinforced the core argument of her recent paper, “The SNAP Loophole That Lets Millionaires Receive Food Stamps”: that Broad-Based Categorical Eligibility (BBCE) has fundamentally eroded SNAP’s policy safeguards by allowing states to sidestep federal income and asset limits. Citing evidence that 43 states and DC have adopted BBCE—most eliminating asset tests entirely—she noted that the loophole now enables millions of households with significant financial resources to qualify for SNAP, including more than 5 million participants whose assets exceed federal thresholds. While sensational cases of millionaire or lottery-winner beneficiaries are statistically rare, Romina stressed that they symbolize a deeper structural problem: states can expand eligibility by linking SNAP to minimal TANF-funded services such as brochures or hotline numbers, yet Washington continues to pay 100 percent of SNAP benefit costs. This misalignment of incentives, she argued, has contributed to long-term caseload expansion, improper payments, and a steady weakening of program integrity. Romina reiterated the article’s call for restoring federal asset limits—an approach supported by 73 percent of U.S. voters—but emphasized that tightening BBCE is only a partial fix. The larger flaw is fiscal: states enjoy the political upside of appearing generous, while federal taxpayers shoulder the financial burden. To realign incentives and ensure that nutritional assistance reaches the truly needy, she advocated for devolving SNAP to the states through block grants and gradually shifting benefit financing to state budgets. According to Romina, think tanks like the Cato Institute play an essential role in exposing systemic inefficiencies in federal programs, quantifying the cost of loopholes such as BBCE—estimated to range from $10 billion to $112 billion over ten years—and advancing market-driven reforms that promote accountability, prudent fiscal management, and genuine economic mobility for vulnerable households. Romina, your research highlights how Broad-Based Categorical Eligibility (BBCE) allows states to bypass federal asset limits, sometimes letting households with substantial wealth—including lottery winners and retirees with significant savings—receive SNAP benefits. How widespread is this issue, and what are the broader implications for program integrity and taxpayer trust?  Millionaires and lottery winners on SNAP are rare, but the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA) estimated in 2023 that ~5.4 million SNAP participants were enrolled through BBCE. This means that over 10 percent of SNAP participants did not meet the program’s own statutory income/asset standards, but still received benefits. The millions of people on SNAP through BBCE is one of many factors, including looser state-level eligibility standards, that have contributed to SNAP’s massive caseload expansion since 2000. As a result, over 40 million Americans, or 1 in 8, rely on the federal government to help them pay for their groceries. The BBCE loophole is emblematic of SNAP's lack of accountability. States share administrative costs with the federal government, giving them the incentive to simplify their paperwork with options like BBCE to streamline eligibility checks. However, they have little stake in controlling enrollment growth or enforcing eligibility standards because federal taxpayers, not the states, pay for the benefits that flow to those brought onto SNAP rolls through those looser rules. Estimates suggest up to 4 million SNAP recipients under BBCE have assets above federal thresholds. From a policy standpoint, should the priority be enforcing stricter federal asset limits, or addressing the structural incentives that encourage states to expand eligibility?  Closing the BBCE loophole to enforce SNAP’s eligibility standards is a good start, but it will not solve the problems embedded in SNAP’s financing structure that gave states the incentive to abuse BBCE in the first place. States have little incentive to enforce eligibility standards or cut costs because the federal government pays 100 percent of the program’s benefits. This leaves states insulated from the financial consequences of their policy choices. OBBBA’s matching fund requirements for states with high improper payments were a good start, but the best way to resolve SNAP's incentive problems is to fully devolve SNAP to the states and hold them accountable for their eligibility decisions.   BBCE links SNAP eligibility to participation in programs like TANF, even when TANF thresholds exceed SNAP’s statutory limits. Do you consider this a design flaw in SNAP itself, or a symptom of deeper federal-state misalignment in welfare policy?  BBCE was initially intended to streamline SNAP administration by eliminating duplicative paperwork for caseworkers, but states have used it to make federal taxpayers pay for backdoor benefit expansions. BBCE, however, is a symptom of a structural incentive misalignment in SNAP and the entire federal-state welfare system. When authority and responsibility diverge, this creates a principal-agent problem. States reap the political benefits of appearing generous through broad benefit expansions but bear few of the financial consequences of paying for them. States further lack accountability for the improper payments and waste that result from inadequate program oversight. Devolving SNAP and other welfare programs to the states is the best way to align incentives with program integrity. Fiscal conservatives have argued that devolving SNAP to the states via block grants could better align benefit authority with financial responsibility. How realistic is this approach politically and economically, and what mechanisms could ensure that needy households are not disadvantaged under state discretion?  The 1996 welfare reforms showed that block-granting major assistance programs is not only politically achievable, but, more importantly, an optimal solution to help the economically disadvantaged. TANF’s remarkable success in increasing employment and reducing poverty for low-income families while drastically reducing caseloads proves that giving states the authority to design their programs empowers them to create assistance programs that are more responsive, targeted, and effective in meeting the local needs of their constituents. Given that some states have abolished asset tests entirely under BBCE, what structural reforms would you recommend to prevent high-asset households from receiving SNAP, while maintaining flexibility for genuinely low-income, asset-rich households who might still need temporary support?  States should bear the full cost of their programs. States are abolishing asset tests to expand SNAP eligibility and have little incentive to prevent high-asset households from receiving benefits because Washington is paying for those benefits. The best way to ensure SNAP benefits go to the truly vulnerable and, more importantly, help recipients achieve self-sufficiency, is to give states a financial stake in doing so. States should have the flexibility to experiment with their programs, including setting asset limits, to determine the best way to tailor assistance to meet the needs of individual recipients. But they should be the ones picking up the tab rather than passing the bill to federal taxpayers. Giving states fiscal responsibility for their welfare programs would incentivize them to either scale back their programs to empower private solutions, or design their assistance to help people rise out of poverty, rather than expanding benefits to capture more federal funding. Analysts suggest potential savings from repealing BBCE range from $10 billion to $112 billion over a decade. How should policymakers balance these savings against the potential risk of excluding households on the margin of need, particularly in economically vulnerable populations?  Repealing BBCE to prevent high-asset households from receiving SNAP benefits is a start, but policymakers should focus on getting welfare programs like SNAP out of Washington. When states bear the full fiscal responsibility for their programs, giving benefits to non-needy households to maximize enrollment becomes expensive, while assistance designed to reduce dependency becomes cost-efficient. Devolving SNAP will also give states the incentive to target aid to the truly vulnerable (the elderly, disabled, and low-income families with children), and design assistance for able-bodied adults as a launchpad to economic independence. SNAP’s current structure, where states administer programs while Washington pays, does the opposite. States are incentivized to maximize enrollment and government dependency to draw more federal dollars, but they have little reason to prioritize self-sufficiency. Decentralizing SNAP is the long-term solution to fixing not just BBCE, but the entire broken incentive structure of federal-state welfare policy. The current structure creates an incentive for states to expand benefits while federal taxpayers foot the bill. In your view, what concrete policy reforms could better align state incentives with fiscal responsibility, without compromising SNAP’s goal of supporting the most vulnerable populations?  Congress should convert SNAP from an open-ended entitlement program into a block grant and gradually reduce the federal government’s share of funding the program’s benefits. This will give states both the flexibility and the fiscal responsibility to determine which forms of support best help the most vulnerable. This includes empowering civil society, such as charities, nonprofits, and private organizations, to craft more responsive and effective forms of assistance than taxpayer-funded entitlements. If states opt to run their own nutritional assistance or other welfare programs, they should have the flexibility to tailor services to support recipients' self-sufficiency. The 1996 welfare reforms to TANF, for example, gave states significant discretion to direct funds toward supports beyond cash benefits, such as work and training programs, childcare, and other services they judged most effective at helping low-income families become self-reliant. Policy reforms that break free from one-size-fits-all federal approaches and empower local, community-based solutions are the best way to promote upward mobility and empower individuals to lift themselves out of poverty. Finally, what role do think tanks and independent policy research institutions like Cato play in shaping the national debate on SNAP reform, particularly regarding BBCE, asset verification, and the potential devolution of the program to states?  The Cato Institute provides independent analysis that cuts through political narratives, highlights structural flaws in federal policy, and offers concrete solutions for how to fix them to government decision-makers in Congress and the Executive. We provide data-driven reforms grounded in the power of free markets, individual liberty, fiscal discipline, and constitutional federalism. Shifting authority from the federal government to state and local levels offers a more effective framework for addressing poverty because local communities are better positioned to meet people’s specific needs and deliver more responsive, targeted assistance than federal programs. More importantly, removing government-created barriers to upward mobility and empowering free markets is a far more effective way to promote economic opportunity for low-income individuals than any top-down wealth redistribution program. -- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3463/dr-markandeya-gorantla-on-how-semiophore-will-make-india-epicenter-of-sustainable-pest-management.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3463/dr-markandeya-gorantla-on-how-semiophore-will-make-india-epicenter-of-sustainable-pest-management.html Tue, 09 Dec 2025 13:34:59 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Dr. Markandeya Gorantla, Chairman & Managing Director of ATGC Biotech, outlines how the newly formed Semiophore JV with Luxembourg Industries marks India’s first global-scale out-licensing of semiochemical IP and positions the country at the forefront of next-generation, residue-free pest management. He explains that the partnership merges ATGC’s decade-long leadership in pheromone biomanufacturing and controlled-release systems with Israel’s formidable regulatory and commercial networks, creating a platform capable of scaling 18 breakthrough technologies across world markets. Dr. Gorantla highlights the JV’s sustainability edge—from ultra-low-dose, zero-water delivery to massive reductions in CO₂e, plastic waste, and insecticide load—supported by rigorous field data and lifecycle metrics. Looking ahead, he notes that Semiophore’s long-term roadmap spans next-generation pheromone chemistry, automated deployment, and climate-smart pest-management platforms, aiming to redefine global crop protection and unlock multi-billion-dollar opportunities for India and Israel. Strategic Vision & Rationale What was the strategic rationale behind forming the Semiophore JV with Luxembourg Industries, and how does this partnership position ATGC Biotech in the global semiochemical and pheromone market ? The formation of Semiophore Ltd. with Luxembourg Industries is a strategic step that aligns ATGC’s scientific leadership with a global commercialization engine capable of taking India’s semiochemical technologies to international markets at scale. ATGC has spent more than a decade building deep capabilities in pheromone biomanufacturing, synthetic biology, and material-science–driven controlled-release systems, areas in which India had no industrial presence prior to our work. Luxembourg Industries, on the other hand, brings more than 50 years of global experience in manufacturing, regulatory operations, and distribution across Israel, Europe, MENA, Latin America, and the United States. The rationale behind Semiophore is to combine India’s innovation strengths with Israel’s proven commercial networks in agriculture, enabling a partnership that neither company could achieve independently. The JV positions ATGC at the forefront of the global pheromone market one of the fastest-growing segments in sustainable agriculture. It allows India not only to compete, but to lead, in an area historically dominated by European and North American players. Semiophore represents India’s first international-scale out-licensing of semiochemical IP, a major milestone in India’s bioeconomy journey and a strong signal of confidence in the scientific quality of Indian innovation. Technology Differentiation Semiophore will deploy 18 advanced semiochemical and pheromone technologies. Could you elaborate on how these technologies differ from conventional chemical pest management methods in terms of efficacy, sustainability, and adoption potential? The 18 technologies being deployed through Semiophore represent a fundamentally different approach to crop protection compared to conventional pesticides. Traditional insecticides operate through chemical toxicity they kill insects through neurotoxic or metabolic disruption and require large quantities, repeated spraying, water usage, and leave behind residues that affect human health, export compliance, and ecosystems. In contrast, ATGC’s pheromone and semiochemical platforms work through behavioral ecology rather than toxicity. By interfering with the mating communication of pests what we describe as “Insect Family Planning” we prevent population buildup without killing beneficial organisms. This is a nature-aligned solution, not a chemical intervention. Our technologies require just 5 grams per acre, compared to hundreds of grams of conventional pesticides. They offer season-long (up to 6 months) protection through advanced controlled-release systems made from mesoporous materials, nano-enabled matrices, and semi-solid emulsion delivery platforms. They require zero water, eliminating the need for spray equipment and mitigating runoff. This combination of ultra-low dose, zero residues, and long-duration control positions the technology as one of the most sustainable pest management systems available worldwide, with adoption potential across smallholder and commercial agriculture. Global Market Deployment: Expected Challenges With regulatory approvals and registrations planned across Israel, Brazil, Australia, and Africa, what are the major scientific, regulatory, or market challenges you anticipate in scaling these technologies internationally? Scaling semiochemical technologies across Israel, Brazil, Australia, and Africa involves navigating scientific, regulatory, and market complexities. Scientifically, pheromone systems are highly pest-specific. Each geography has different climatic conditions temperature, humidity, canopy structure that influence release kinetics and behavioral response. Semiophore will work closely with agricultural universities, entomology departments, and local regulators to optimize dose, spacing, and delivery parameters for each region. From a regulatory standpoint, every country has its own framework for approving biochemical pesticides, which requires field trials, toxicology assessments, environmental impact data, and manufacturing audits. ATGC’s existing regulatory experience in the US, India, and multiple international programs provides a strong foundation for navigating these pathways. Marketwise, the largest challenge is behavioral farmers are accustomed to chemical sprays. Semiophore will address this through demonstration farms, season-long monitoring, and extension partnerships that show the tangible economic benefits of shifting to pheromone-based systems. Despite these challenges, the global shift toward residue-free, climate-positive agriculture creates unprecedented demand for precisely the technologies ATGC has developed. Sustainability Impact & Metrics Semiophore emphasizes residue-free, pollinator-safe, and climate-resilient crop protection. How do you quantify or measure the environmental benefits—such as reduced insecticide use, lower CO₂e, water, and plastic footprint—of these technologies? Semiophore’s technologies are inherently sustainable because they eliminate the externalities associated with conventional chemical pesticides. We quantify these benefits using a combination of field data, lifecycle assessment, and modeling. Insecticide reduction is measured by comparing conventional spray schedules with 8 to 15 sprays totaling hundreds of grams of active ingredient against pheromone technologies that require only 5 grams per acre. CO₂e avoidance is calculated from reductions in chemical synthesis, transportation, storage, and repeated spraying operations. Based on ATGC’s current deployments, we estimate 2.5 million tons of CO₂e could be avoided as the technology scales. Water savings come directly from the zero-water nature of the system; farmers no longer rely on 200–400 liters of water per spray round. Across millions of acres, this results in over 20 billion liters of water saved. Plastic waste reduction is measured through reduced pesticide container usage, eliminating up to 40,000 tons of plastic annually in large-scale programs. Together, these metrics create a compelling climate and ESG case for Semiophore, opening the door to carbon-credit generation, green financing, and sustainability-linked partnerships. Adoption by Farmers What strategies will Semiophore employ to drive adoption among smallholders and large-scale growers, particularly in regions where conventional chemical pest control is entrenched? Adoption depends on demonstrating a clear, tangible difference in farmer outcomes. Semiophore will deploy a multi-layered adoption strategy. For smallholders, the focus will be on simplicity and cost: A 5-gram product that requires no water Season-long control No need for repeated spraying Compatibility with organic and IPM systems These advantages significantly reduce farmer labor, costs, and risk. For large-scale growers, the emphasis is on export compliance and predictability. Pheromone solutions eliminate residues, protect pollinators, and reduce variability in pest pressure critical factors for global markets. Semiophore will also deploy drone-based deployment systems and automation for plantation crops. The JV will work closely with government programs, cooperatives, and agricultural extension networks, supported by strong data dashboards and field teams. Demonstration plots will serve as the anchor of adoption strategy, showing farmers real-season results. Innovation, IP, and R&D Leadership How will ATGC Biotech’s IP, R&D, and technology leadership be leveraged within the JV to ensure continuous innovation and competitive advantage in the global semiochemical space? ATGC contributes a deep technology stack to Semiophore: 26 granted patents, multiple international filings, and some of the world’s most advanced biochemical delivery systems. Our synthetic biology platform enables cost-efficient pheromone biomanufacturing an area where traditional chemical synthesis has historically been expensive. Semiophore will benefit not only from ATGC’s existing innovations but from a continuous pipeline of next-generation technologies: enhanced blends, improved release kinetics, hybrid peptide pheromone solutions, nano-enabled matrices, and drone compatible formats. The JV structure ensures that ATGC retains IP ownership while providing Semiophore with global commercialization rights. This creates a competitive moat that strengthens over time, allowing the JV to lead the semiochemical space with sustained innovation. Commercial & Economic Impact Could you share projections for revenue, market capture, and job creation across India and Israel, and how the JV aims to create measurable socio-economic impact in these regions? The Semiophore JV is expected to catalyze significant economic gains for both India and Israel. In India, it will expand ATGC’s R&D, regulatory, and manufacturing footprint, creating jobs in synthetic biology, analytical chemistry, formulation science, engineering, agronomy, and field operations. The India-based manufacturing and export ecosystem will grow as new markets scale. In Israel, the JV will generate new employment opportunities in manufacturing, quality control, agronomy, regulatory affairs, and distribution. It will also strengthen Israel’s portfolio of sustainable agricultural inputs, opening export channels for green technologies. The global semiochemical market is projected to surpass USD 10–12 billion over the coming decade; Semiophore aims to capture a meaningful share of this through differentiated technologies and strategic international partnerships. Long-term Roadmap & Expansion Beyond the initial 18 products, what is the long-term vision for Semiophore in terms of expanding the portfolio, integrating next-generation delivery systems, and shaping the global landscape of sustainable, behavior-based crop protection? Semiophore’s long-term vision extends far beyond the initial set of 18 products. The JV will progressively expand into: Next-generation pheromone blends Solid and semi-solid delivery systems optimized for varied climates Encapsulated peptides, kairomones, and biological synergists Automated application technologies, including drones and ground rigs End-to-end precision-pest-management platforms Integrated climate-smart solutions aligned with carbon markets The end goal is to build the world’s most advanced behavior-based crop protection platform one that replaces chemical insecticides across millions of acres while enabling nations to meet their sustainability and climate targets. -- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3457/global-cereals-break-3-billion-tonne-barrier-as-wheat-maize-and-rice-drive-new-era-of-abundance.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3457/global-cereals-break-3-billion-tonne-barrier-as-wheat-maize-and-rice-drive-new-era-of-abundance.html Fri, 05 Dec 2025 15:47:45 +0530 FAO’s latest outlook paints a picture of record harvests, buoyant stocks, and steady trade momentum heading into 2026 In a landmark moment for global agriculture, the FAO’s latest forecast places world cereal production in 2025 at 3 003 million tonnes—the first time global output is set to exceed the three-billion-tonne threshold. The upward revision, released this month, reflects stronger-than-expected performances across wheat, coarse grains, and rice, underscoring a year in which favourable weather, robust plantings, and resilient supply chains helped agriculture overcome persistent climate and geopolitical uncertainties. The biggest lift came from wheat. Argentina, buoyed by larger-than-anticipated plantings and likely record yields, is poised for a historic harvest, reshaping the global supply picture. Additional output upgrades for the European Union and the United States further strengthened the wheat outlook. Coarse grains also saw modest improvements—primarily from higher barley estimates—while the rice sector recorded a sharp upward adjustment after Indonesia confirmed continued area expansions that will support a larger-than-expected offseason crop. With improved prospects for Bangladesh and Japan, global rice production for 2025/26 is now projected at 558.8 million tonnes (milled basis), up 1.6% from last year and at an all-time high. Countries spearheading the rice surge include Bangladesh, Brazil, China, India, and Indonesia, more than offsetting anticipated declines in Madagascar, Nepal, Pakistan, Thailand, and the U.S. Solid Start for 2026 Winter Wheat Planting of the 2026 winter wheat crop is advancing steadily across the Northern Hemisphere. In the U.S., sowing remains on schedule, though only 45 per cent of the crop is rated good to excellent, down 10 percentage points from last year amid ongoing dryness. The EU’s planting campaign is progressing with largely favourable conditions despite localized rainfall deficits in Italy. Russia completed its winter wheat sowing by November under mostly beneficial weather, while improved soil moisture in Ukraine helped alleviate early-season concerns, supporting expectations of a larger—though still sub-pre-war—wheat area. Across South Asia, India and Pakistan are set for expansive wheat sowings, driven by remunerative prices and strengthened policy support. Southern Hemisphere Begins Maize Cycle with Optimism South America’s early signals for 2026 coarse grain production point to a rebound year. Regular early-season rains in Argentina have supported strong maize establishment, while Brazil, bolstered by firm domestic and export demand, is expected to expand maize plantings above its five-year average. In South Africa, a marginal increase in maize area—particularly for yellow maize—is anticipated amid expectations of a favourable rainfall season. Cereal Utilization to Hit a Fresh Peak Global cereal utilization for 2025/26 is forecast to rise 2.1 per cent to 59.2 million tonnes above last year, driven by increases across all major cereals. Ample supplies and stable prices are expected to encourage greater use of maize, barley, and sorghum in animal feed, with feed-quality wheat also becoming an attractive alternative. Rice consumption is projected to expand 2.4 per cent, reaching a new peak of 552.8 million tonnes, supported by comfortable availability in key producing and consuming regions. Record Stocks Strengthen Global Food Security Buffer World cereal stocks by the end of the 2026 seasons are now projected at a record 925.5 million tonnes, up 6.5 per cent from opening levels. China and India are expected to drive the largest increases in wheat reserves, while Brazil and the U.S. will anchor the growth in coarse grain stocks. Revisions this month include upward adjustments to: Wheat stocks in Argentina and the U.S. Maize inventories in Brazil, following an improved segunda safra outlook Rice stocks, which rose by 1.5 million tonnes due to enhanced expectations in Indonesia The ratio of major exporters’ stocks to disappearance is expected to climb to 22.3 per cent, the highest since the early 1990s—a robust cushion against market volatility. Global Cereal Trade Set for a Rebound FAO projects world cereal trade in 2025/26 at 500.6 million tonnes, a 3.3 per cent rise from last season. Wheat trade is forecast to rebound from the subdued levels of 2024/25, supported by renewed import demand from Pakistan and Türkiye and steady buying across Asia amid stable prices and abundant exportable supplies. Coarse grain trade is also poised to expand, with Brazil emerging as a new sorghum exporter. Wheat export forecasts for Argentina have been raised further, with its record harvest likely to find buyers in neighbouring markets such as Ecuador. Global rice trade for calendar year 2026 is estimated at 61.2 million tonnes, largely unchanged from last month but 1.4 per cent below 2025 levels, reflecting reduced import prospects across parts of Asia. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3455/brazils-biologicals-at-inflection-point-marcelo-de-godoy-oliveiras-vision-for-high-science-high-quality-bioeconomy.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3455/brazils-biologicals-at-inflection-point-marcelo-de-godoy-oliveiras-vision-for-high-science-high-quality-bioeconomy.html Fri, 05 Dec 2025 15:30:33 +0530 In an exclusive Agrospectrum interview, Marcelo de Godoy Oliveira, President of ABINBIO, explains that Brazil’s more than 30 per cent bioinputs surge is driven by pest pressure, chemical resistance, fertilizer dependence, and rapid scientific advances. He stresses that strict MAPA–industry oversight is essential to prevent a “wild west” of substandard products as the sector scales. Brazil’s biodiversity, combined with strong public–private R&D and emerging IP frameworks in gene editing, positions the country for global leadership. Marcelo highlights that biologicals in Brazil already deliver >90 per cent positive ROI in monitored applications and are fast becoming core to decarbonisation strategies. Looking ahead to 2035, he predicts only companies with deep science, industrial scale, and elite agronomic support will survive in a rapidly maturing market. Market Dynamics & Inflection Point Brazil’s bioinputs market is growing 30 per cent + annually even as global agrichem slows. What is the real inflection point—scientific breakthroughs, fertiliser volatility, climate pressures, or structural shifts in Brazil’s agri-economy ? The growth in bio-input use in Brazil is associated with four fundamental factors. The first factor relates to the significant increase in pest and disease incidence in agricultural systems. Being a tropical climate country, Brazil develops high-intensity agriculture, characterized by so-called "green bridges," which offer constant food supply for the accelerated proliferation of pests. Consequently, there is an increase in the number of pesticide applications in crops. This scenario leads to the second factor: the development of pest and disease resistance to chemical pesticides, resulting from continuous and repeated exposure to these products. Faced with this, rural producers begin seeking complementary management tools, such as biodefensives, to achieve greater efficacy in controlling phytopathogenic agents. The third factor is related to the country's high dependence on fertilizer imports, combined with the high prices charged for these inputs. This situation encourages producers to seek alternatives that increase the utilization of nutrients already present in the soil or enhance the efficiency of applied fertilizers, allowing, in some cases, dose reduction. An example is the use of phosphorus solubilizers to reduce the need for phosphate fertilization. Finally, the fourth and, in my opinion, most important factor refers to the advancement of scientific research and development of microbiological technologies, as well as the modernization of manufacturing facilities dedicated to the sector. Brazilian industries have distinguished themselves through high production capacity, elevated technological level, and experienced professionals in manufacturing both pesticides and other microbiological inputs. The combination of these factors makes Brazil stand out globally in adoption, technological development, and business investment in the bio-inputs segment. Quality, Oversight & “Wild West” Risk With 400+ manufacturers and thousands of on-farm biofactories, how is ABINBIO working with MAPA to ensure enforceable quality standards and avoid a fragmented “wild west” of inconsistent products? Our work with the Federal Government aims to raise awareness about the importance of maintaining rigorous rules for bio-input production, preventing the entry or manufacture of low-quality products in the country. Brazil is a global reference in the microbiological segment applied to agribusiness, and therefore requires legislation that safeguards product quality and continuously stimulates technological development, guaranteeing effective and safe tools so that our main partner—the rural producer—achieves increasing success in their activity. Additionally, there is a determining factor for company competitiveness in the market: people. Producers will always prioritize technologies that deliver proven results and add intelligence to their operation. Therefore, companies that do not invest in high-performance professionals will hardly remain competitive in the long term, and this investment, while essential, requires resources. Finally, we have reinforced to the Federal Government that the national bio-inputs industry is a true diamond in the making, becoming an important source of income for countless Brazilian families. The sector has been generating a significant number of jobs, contributing directly to the country's social development. R&D Leadership & Microbiome Advantage Brazil’s biodiversity gives it a strong edge in nitrogen-fixing, phosphate-solubilising and pest-suppressive microbes. What R&D platforms, public–private models, or IP frameworks can convert this into true global competitive advantage ? Yes, our biodiversity favors us extraordinarily. Brazil has different biomes that function as true open-air collections, providing numerous discoveries of microbiological actives that stand out in performance when processed through our advanced bioprocesses, formulations, quality standards, and high industrial capacity. Additionally, we have highly qualified public institutions that support the identification and study of these new actives, such as Embrapa, globally recognized as a reference in the bio-inputs segment. Regarding intellectual property protection, we are working together with the government and advancing in the use of gene editing and genetic engineering techniques. When associated with microorganism functions and our formulations, these technologies make products patentable, creating an important level of protection. However, biopiracy is still a reality and will continue to be combated by both industry and Brazilian regulatory agencies. Biologicals vs Chemicals: Real Economics Growers report variable field results. What does the real economic equation look like—yield stability, input substitution and ROI—when biologicals complement or replace synthetics at scale ? We have a rigorous performance monitoring system, advanced quality control, well-defined technical positioning, and differentiated follow-up conducted by our field specialists. As a consequence, more than 90 per cent of our technology applications show positive results. This level of efficiency is reflected in a high repurchase rate, since ultimately, we manage to generate excellent return on investment for the producer. As for the substitution or combined use of chemical and biological products, this depends greatly on the segment. A clear example is the use of biological nematicides, which has been growing for several years and, in many cases, already replaces the use of conventional pesticides. I believe that in the near future, bio-inputs will replace chemicals in other segments as well. However, it is important to understand that our main objective is to support rural producers in their mission to produce more food for the world. And for this, the combination of chemical and biological tools—when well positioned and integrated—makes all the difference. Brazil as a Global Bioinputs Powerhouse Foreign firms are validating products under Brazil’s tropical stress conditions. Can Brazil become a global exporter of biological technologies? What capabilities—regulatory strength, manufacturing, consortium science—must improve ? We are exporting, each year, a greater volume of microbiological technologies to various international markets. I believe that soon Brazil will globally lead this segment, as large foreign companies have been seeking to establish strategic partnerships with us. This movement is only possible thanks to the high quality of our products, the large industrial capacity installed in the country, consistent investments in international registrations, and the development of strong regulatory expertise by our teams, who work closely with regulatory agencies in other countries. I have no doubt that the global bio-inputs market will be largely led by major Brazilian players in the coming years. Fast-Tracking vs Environmental Risk Brazil’s fast regulatory approvals accelerate innovation but raise biosafety concerns. Do rapid pathways risk blind spots, especially for microbial consortia and next-gen metabolic boosters ? The rapid approval of biodefensives in Brazil is only possible due to the excellent work developed by our regulatory agencies (MAPA, Anvisa, and IBAMA). Our legislation is strict and requires, in addition to efficacy tests, various toxicological and ecotoxicological tests, thus generating low environmental risk when the product is approved by these agencies. Soil Carbon, ESG & Bioeconomy Transition With tighter MRL norms and carbon-linked premiums emerging, will biologicals become central to Brazil’s ESG and decarbonisation strategy ? What policy tools could speed this transition ? Undoubtedly, bio-inputs play a critical role in decarbonization mechanisms, as they act directly in reducing GHG emissions associated with the use of energy-intensive inputs and increasing the biogeochemical efficiency of production systems. Growth-promoting microorganisms, solubilizers, biological nitrogen fixers, and biocontrol agents contribute to reducing CO₂, N₂O, and CH₄ emissions, while favoring carbon sequestration processes in soil through increased microbial biomass, enhanced aggregate stability, formation of humic substances, and improved nutrient cycling dynamics. For these impacts to be fully integrated into decarbonization policies, strengthening the regulatory and methodological framework is essential. Priority needs include: Enhancement of MRV (Measurement, Reporting, and Verification) protocols Inclusion of specific methodologies to quantify GHG reductions and removals resulting from bio-input application, with standardized parameters according to GHG Protocol, ISO 14064, ISO 14067, and LCA (Life Cycle Assessment) methodologies. Harmonization of certification rules Creation of regulatory flows that enable official recognition of these gains in instruments such as voluntary carbon markets and regulated programs (e.g., methodologies analogous to RenovaBio, REDD+, and Carbon Farming frameworks). Integration with government agencies and technical institutions Establishment of guidelines for credit monetization, including definitions of baseline, additionality, emission factors, permanence, and reversal risks, providing legal certainty to the industrial sector and producers. Official recognition of biotechnological pathways Formalization of emission reduction routes via nutrient solubilization, biological fixation, energy-intensive pest biocontrol, and root biostimulation processes, ensuring eligibility in carbon markets. The consolidation of these elements will allow bio-input use to be robustly incorporated into mitigation policies, increasing national industry competitiveness and positioning Brazil as a scientific, regulatory, and commercial leader in the global carbon market associated with agricultural biotechnology. The 2035 Horizon By 2035, what will separate leaders from laggards in Brazil’s bioinputs industry—strain IP, digital agronomy, consortium formulations, farmer extension networks, or something else? There is no doubt that in the coming years, the national industry will undergo an intense differentiation process, in which only the most structured companies will remain competitive. This movement will be driven by the launch of truly disruptive technologies, the high production capacity of our industries, and the qualification of technical service offered to producers. Increasingly, rural producers will demand highly skilled professionals—well-compensated and up-to-date agronomists who bring not just products, but applied scientific knowledge to all areas of their business. These factors will be decisive in separating the wheat from the chaff, resulting in a competitive market, but one of higher quality and with fewer competitors. Although many wish to enter the bio-inputs sector, few have investment capacity, operational robustness, and technical preparation to maintain and grow, especially given the challenges faced in recent years. In other words, by 2035, only truly strong and technically prepared players will survive. -- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3449/zero-waste-gourmet-how-parmesan-rinds-corn-cobs-and-vegetable-stems-are-becoming-culinary-gold.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3449/zero-waste-gourmet-how-parmesan-rinds-corn-cobs-and-vegetable-stems-are-becoming-culinary-gold.html Thu, 04 Dec 2025 15:53:09 +0530 In a world where climate pledges are tightening, supply chains are wobbling under the weight of ecological pressure, and consumers are dissecting the ethics of every bite they take, an unlikely protagonist is stepping into the sustainability spotlight: The humble kitchen scrap. Parmesan rinds, corn cobs, mushroom stems, carrot tops — the culinary castoffs that once met an unceremonious end in the compost bin — are now being reimagined as the building blocks of a new gastronomic economy. What was once waste is becoming wealth. What was once dismissed is being elevated. And what was once an afterthought is rapidly becoming a frontline strategy in the global conversation on food, flavor, and resource intelligence. This renaissance is not driven by sentimentality or nostalgia. It is driven by taste, economics, and a growing impatience with the inefficiencies embedded in modern cooking. Zero-waste cuisine has existed for centuries, largely as a quiet wisdom passed down through home kitchens and grandmother logic. Michelin-starred chefs are designing entire tasting menus around “secondary” ingredients, proving that carrot peels and leek tops are every bit as capable of delivering complexity as their more photogenic counterparts. Food multinationals are investing in upcycled ingredient pipelines, turning citrus peels into premium extracts and vegetable stems into functional flavor bases. The thesis animating this movement is elegantly subversive: Flavor has no hierarchy. A corn cob is not lesser than a kernel; a Parmesan rind is not inferior to the wedge it encases. Flavor is democratic, distributed, and often hiding in the places we were taught to ignore. What began as a sustainability whisper has grown into a culinary roar. The rise of zero-waste cooking is no longer a trend; it is a structural realignment, a philosophical pivot, and a sensory revolution. It is reminding us — with the force of both data and deliciousness — that the future of food may lie not in new ingredients, but in old ones we simply overlooked. The Economic Rationale: Why Scraps Make Sense Now A perfect storm of forces is propelling zero-waste cooking from the fringes of sustainability discourse into the beating heart of mainstream food culture. Global food inflation — no longer a temporary spike but a structural reality — has recalibrated how consumers value every ingredient on the chopping board. Food waste, now estimated to swallow a staggering one-third of all food produced worldwide, is morphing from an ethical embarrassment into a fully fledged economic and regulatory liability. At the same time, a cultural shift is underway: consumers hungry for authenticity, craftsmanship, and ingredient transparency are gravitating toward practices that feel both honest and ingenious. Zero-waste cooking sits precisely at that intersection. “Banana peels are one of my favorite undercover ingredients — a brilliant plant-based ‘meat’ if you treat them right. Wash them well, slice or shred, then sauté with onions and garlic until they soften and take on that gorgeous golden edge. Hit them with tomato paste, spices, and a splash of broth, and they turn silky, savory, and shockingly satisfying. Parmesan rinds? That’s pure umami currency. I drop them into stocks for depth, or shave them thin and microwave them into crispy, salty wafers that disappear in seconds. Corn cobs work harder than most people realize. Simmer them with a little sugar and water and you’ve got a beautiful, naturally sweet corn syrup for cocktails or dessert glazes — and the spent cobs add a subtle, smoky dimension when tossed into the grill. Also please don’t ever throw away onion skins, garlic peels, or herb stems. Blend them into a paste, sauté in fat, season well — that becomes the foundation, the soul, the quiet bass note that makes any meat dish sing.” --- Toni Marie ElKhouri, Owner and Executive Chef of Cedars Café ; Award winning chef that specializes in sustainable & low waste northern Lebanese & Mediterranean cuisine The economic opportunity hidden in scraps is immense — bordering on untapped gold. Take Parmigiano-Reggiano, a global icon with more than 4 million wheels produced each year. About 8 to 12 percent of every wheel is rind, a hard, rugged outer layer brimming with concentrated umami, aromatic oils, and structural integrity. That means tens of thousands of tonnes of culinary potential quietly shaving away at dairy factories — a resource so flavorful that chefs guard it like bullion, yet one that rarely makes its way into home kitchens. Or consider corn. With over 1.2 billion metric tons produced globally, corn is one of the world’s most powerful agricultural engines. The cob alone accounts for roughly 15 percent of the plant’s biomass. And yet, the cob — an ingredient capable of yielding silk-textured broths and sweet, velvety infusions — is almost entirely absent from the mainstream culinary economy. Even at the microeconomic level of the household, the numbers are startling. Studies consistently show that families discard between 15 and 25 percent of the edible food they bring home. Not because it has spoiled, but because confusion, habit, and aesthetic bias lead us to misjudge what is truly usable. Much of what lands in the bin is not trash but flavor — dormant, disguised, and waiting to be activated. This is why zero-waste cooking is evolving beyond sustainability rhetoric. It is fast becoming an economic strategy with measurable impact. Households that rethink scraps can cut grocery costs meaningfully. Restaurants leveraging stems, peels, and trimmings can slash overheads without compromising — indeed, often enhancing — culinary quality. Food companies that upcycle rinds, pulps, and peels into premium ingredients are unlocking entirely new revenue verticals in a market hungry for both thrift and flavor. We are no longer dealing with a trend of ethical goodwill. We are watching the architecture of a new food economy take shape — one built on the radical premise that nothing natural is ever truly waste until we fail to imagine its value. The Flavor Frontier: What Gourmet Chefs Always Knew For decades, the world’s leading chefs have guarded a quiet secret — one that feels almost radical in an era obsessed with perfect produce aesthetics and Instagram-ready plating. Scraps are not waste. Scraps are strategy. They are flavor reservoirs hiding in plain sight. The modern zero-waste gourmet revolution didn’t emerge from environmentalism alone. It emerged from taste — from the recognition that the most intense, concentrated flavor compounds are rarely found in the polished, photogenic cuts supermarkets train us to buy. Instead, they’re wrapped inside the rinds, the cobs, the stems, the peels — the overlooked parts that rarely make it past the cutting board. The truth is, chefs have always known this, and they’ve been quietly orchestrating culinary magic from what most of us casually discard. Parmesan rinds, corn cobs, vegetable stems, mushroom stems, citrus peels — these are far from mere scraps. They are the hidden alchemy of flavor, the secret chords that transform simple ingredients into symphonies of taste. They carry depth, texture, and aroma that no shortcut, no processed powder, no pre-grated convenience can ever replicate. In professional kitchens, every simmer, every braise, every careful infusion is a deliberate act of culinary physics. Broths bloom with the slow-release glutamates of cheese rinds. Chowders gain silkiness from corn cob starches. Sauces and pestos build scaffolding from vegetable stems. Mushroom stems provide the earthy bass notes that elevate the simplest dishes into indulgent, forest-floor luxury. Citrus peels, when charred or candied, infuse brightness and perfume that linger long after the plate is cleared. Leftovers become legend, byproducts transform into treasures, and the kitchen becomes a laboratory of relentless, joyous experimentation. It is an orchestration of taste, a celebration of the overlooked, and a manifesto for turning every ingredient, however humble, into gold. For those who understand it, nothing is wasted; everything is potential, waiting to reveal its hidden brilliance trying to tell us for years. Modern cookbooks rarely capture the messy, improvisational brilliance of real kitchens, but from Kyoto to Copenhagen, the greatest culinary minds have lived by an unspoken principle: Waste is a cultural invention, not a culinary truth. Massimo Bottura — the rebellious Italian maestro behind Osteria Francescana and the Food for Soul movement — stands at the forefront of this philosophy. Bottura famously transformed stale bread into a silky, caramelized dessert now considered a contemporary masterpiece. He turned Parmigiano rinds into the now-legendary “Parmigiano acqua,” a deceptively simple infusion that produces astonishing depth. Chefs from New York to São Paulo imitate it today. Bottura’s work is built on a profound insight: flavor is not a luxury. Waste is. Look closely, and you’ll see the zero-waste gourmet movement is not a trend at all. It is a return to culinary science — to extraction, infusion, fermentation, and dehydration, the ancient technologies that sustained civilizations long before refrigeration and industrial processing arrived. Extraction calls for drawing intensity from bones, shells, peels, and pits. Infusion relies on oils, tannins, and aromatics slowly releasing into liquids. Fermentation transforms scraps into acids, fizz, and umami. Dehydration preserves while amplifying flavor. These techniques show up everywhere: French grandmothers simmering onion skins for broth, Korean halmeonis making kimchi brines from vegetable stubs, Japanese chefs shaving dried fish bones for dashi, Indian households sun-drying citrus peels for digestive powders. Today, chefs market these techniques as sustainability. Historically, they were simply good cooking. Home cooks are rediscovering what chefs never forgot. The rise of zero-waste gourmet cooking isn’t driven solely by climate consciousness, although that matters. It is driven by economic logic and flavor efficiency. Food prices are rising globally, consumers are cooking more at home, gourmet techniques have been democratized by social media, and people want healthier, more flavorful meals without expensive ingredients. Scraps offer all of this, at zero additional cost. A single Parmesan rind can elevate a simple broth into a restaurant-level experience. A corn cob can transform a summer soup into a velvety, Michelin-grade velouté. Mushroom stems, long ignored, can outperform truffle shavings in pure umami satisfaction. These are not compromises. They are enhancements. This is why the future of zero-waste cooking is not about guilt. It is about flavor. Scraps are not a moral choice; they are a flavor choice. They are not punishment; they are opportunity. They are not leftovers; they are leverage. What Bottura, Barber, and countless quiet geniuses in professional kitchens around the world have proven is simple: the world does not need more ingredients. It needs more imagination. And the most underutilized raw material in the global food system is sitting right in front of us — not in the gleaming produce aisles, but in the bowls and bins we’ve been taught to discard. Welcome to the flavor frontier. It’s time to cook the way chefs always have. The Zero-Waste Consumer: A New Demographic Emerges A new kind of consumer is reshaping the modern food economy — one who reads labels as closely as financial statements, who sees culinary creativity as a form of personal branding, and who treats kitchen scraps not as trash but as raw material. This demographic is young, eco-literate, digitally native, and increasingly influential. And their rise signals a profound shift in how value is constructed in the food ecosystem. What has changed is not just environmental awareness, but cultural perception. For decades, frugality was associated with necessity. Today, it has been elevated into a lifestyle choice — a fusion of economic rationality, culinary aspiration, and ethical coherence. Social media has acted as the accelerant: platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube have collapsed the distance between professional chefs and home cooks. A single “upcycle your scraps” video can accumulate millions of views overnight, reframing what once looked like thrift as artistry. Turning carrot tops into pesto or corn cobs into velouté isn’t just resourceful — it’s cool, performative, and narratively rich. It signals intelligence, sustainability, and competence all at once. Three underlying forces drive this demographic’s growth, though none operates in isolation. The first is economic pressure. In a world where grocery bills inch upward faster than wages, consumers have turned cost-efficiency into a form of empowerment. The ability to stretch ingredients without compromising quality feels less like compromise and more like strategic mastery. Saving money has become aspirational — a way to display control, creativity, and financial literacy. The second force is gourmet ambition. The internet has democratized access to culinary techniques once trapped behind the stainless-steel doors of elite restaurants. Video tutorials reveal how Michelin-level chefs coax extraordinary flavor from overlooked scraps. Suddenly, transforming stems, rinds, peels, or bones into gourmet dishes is not only possible but celebrated. This creates a cultural shift: waste reduction is no longer an act of deprivation, but a mark of sophistication. The zero-waste kitchen becomes a stage for ingenuity, where the cook becomes a kind of flavor alchemist. Scraps become a new frontier for experimentation, a way to express one’s palate, identity, and aesthetics. Finally, there is the ethical undertow. Food waste now appears not just financially reckless but morally outdated. With climate anxieties rising and documentaries illuminating the environmental cost of discarded produce, consumers increasingly view wastefulness as an ethical failure — a breach of personal responsibility. Using scraps allows them to uphold their values without sacrificing pleasure. It delivers what modern consumers want most: sustainability without pain, ethics without compromise, responsibility without austerity. Zero-waste cooking, in this sense, becomes a guilt-free path to indulgence. This shift has not gone unnoticed by the food industry. Retailers, always sensitive to emerging micro-cultures, are beginning to treat scraps as a product category rather than a liability. In upscale grocery chains, bundles of vegetable stems are marketed specifically for broths and pestos. Artisanal producers have introduced rind-based flavor kits that mirror chef techniques, turning what once sat in waste bins into premium SKUs. Upcycled sauces made from tomato skins or carrot pulp now occupy the same shelves as craft condiments. Even dehydrated citrus peel seasonings — once the domain of grandmother pantries — have been reborn as gourmet cocktail rimmers and dessert garnishes. What began in Michelin kitchens is quietly becoming a mainstream retail strategy. Scraps are crossing the chasm from necessity to desirability, from background noise to hero ingredient. And as consumers embrace the idea that flavor can come from anywhere — not just the glossy, camera-ready parts of produce — brands are discovering a rare convergence of profit, sustainability, and cultural momentum. In the evolution of food trends, few shifts are as structurally significant as this one. The zero-waste consumer represents not just a new market segment, but a new mindset — one in which creativity, economy, and ethics align so seamlessly that the boundaries between them dissolve. This demographic is not merely responding to a trend. They are building a new culinary culture, one rind, stem, cob, and peel at a time. A Future Where “Scrap” Becomes a Culinary Relic The global food system is undergoing profound reinvention. Climate volatility, soil degradation, supply chain disruptions, and unpredictable harvests are forcing consumers and companies to rethink resource efficiency. At the same time, diners demand deeper umami, brighter aromatics, layered textures, and compelling culinary narratives. Zero-waste cooking sits at the intersection of these pressures, where sustainability and flavor reinforce each other. “People are more mindful than ever about food waste — and for good reason. With global conversations around food disparity and real-time awareness of how much we throw away, there’s finally a collective shift happening. Add rising grocery costs to the mix, and home cooks are learning to stretch every ingredient to its fullest potential. Parmesan rinds, for example, are absolute magic. Drop them into soups or a simmering pot of tomato sauce and they melt their umami right into the dish. Onion skins, carrot peelings, herb stems, chicken bones — these so-called ‘discards’ make some of the most flavorful stocks you’ll ever taste. Then there are the everyday heroes: fried rice, omelets, casseroles — dishes purpose-built to transform scraps and leftovers into something comforting and complete. Look across the culinary world and you’ll see this philosophy deeply rooted in Korean, Japanese, and Chinese cooking especially. Nothing is wasted. Every trim has a purpose. Every scrap has a role. That mindset is as economical as it is delicious — a true chef’s way of respecting the ingredient.” -- Chef Katie Vine, the culinary mind behind Dinners Done Quick The concept of “waste” is losing relevance. Parmesan rinds are now marketed as concentrated umami cores. Corn cobs serve as natural broth starters, their starches adding sweetness and texture. Vegetable stems function as flavor anchors. Citrus peels provide aromatic lift and bitter-sweet complexity. Mushroom stems deliver earthy, savory intensity. What was once scrap is becoming a premium ingredient category, echoing the rise of cascara and whey — byproducts turned commodities. The shift is philosophical as much as commercial. Zero-waste cooking succeeds not through virtue but through flavor, control, and mastery. Using scraps is an act of culinary intelligence. Deeper broths, richer oils, and cleaner pantries make sustainability a byproduct of technique, not an obligation. When flavor leads, behavior change becomes seamless. As AI optimizes household patterns, fermentation expands possibilities, and upcycling scales industrially, the idea of a “scrap” may disappear. Every peel, stem, core, leaf, rind, and husk will hold deliberate culinary value. Future cookbooks will map potential, not waste. The kitchen, once one of the most wasteful spaces, is becoming a model of circular design. Ingredients destined for trash will drive new flavors, textures, and innovations. The question will no longer be how to use scraps, but what extraordinary flavors have been ignored, and what else are we still discarding? -- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3443/indias-first-geo-referenced-marine-fisheries-census-to-redefine-blue-economy-strategy-union-minister-george-kurian.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3443/indias-first-geo-referenced-marine-fisheries-census-to-redefine-blue-economy-strategy-union-minister-george-kurian.html Tue, 02 Dec 2025 15:41:21 +0530 In an exclusive Agrospectrum interview, George Kurian, Minister of State for Minority Affairs and Fisheries, Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Government of India, elaborated on the Marine Fisheries Census (MFC) 2025 as a historic shift from estimation-based planning to a new era of evidence-driven, precision governance. He emphasised that the Census—powered by VyAS-BHARAT and VyAS-SUTRA—creates a dynamic, multidimensional, and scientifically validated foundation that will reshape policy design, welfare delivery, sustainability planning, and global market competitiveness. Under the visionary leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the MFC 2025 becomes the central pillar of India’s marine-sector transformation, aligning governance with the long-term national aspiration of Viksit Bharat 2047.  George Kurian highlighted that the Ministry’s initiatives under the guidance of Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Union Cabinet Minister of Panchayati Raj and Minister of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India, are already delivering record levels of production and exports while ensuring that technology, sustainability, and inclusivity permeate every intervention. The Census’s unprecedented household-level granularity will enable targeted welfare distribution, fisherwomen-led entrepreneurship, and a scientific roadmap for deep-sea expansion, mariculture growth, and ecosystem-based fisheries management.  Ultimately, MFC 2025 equips India with the consolidated intelligence needed to emerge as a top-3 global seafood power, setting new international benchmarks in transparency, traceability, and responsible ocean stewardship. Edited excerpts: The MFC 2025 is described as a foundational dataset for Indian marine fisheries. How will this census reshape policy planning, coastal livelihood schemes and blue economy development over the next decade ? The MFC 2025 will fundamentally reshape planning by providing a cogent, granular database with a multidimensional focus on the sector for the first time. For Policy: The Census will provide us with real time data. We will have a precise, multi-dimensional understanding of the present condition—financial status, equipment ownership, and infrastructure status—of every single fishing family and village. This becomes the bedrock for rolling out schemes like Pradhan Mantri Matsya Yojana (PMMSY), allowing for highly focused and requirement-based allocation of resources. For Livelihoods: The Census provides a "ringside view" of skill levels within fisher families. This is critical. It allows us to strategically plan alternative livelihood support, such as diversification into deep-sea fishing or targeted development of mariculture avenues, based on the actual skills and capacity present in the community. For the Blue Economy: This database will serve as the scientific and spatial map we need for sustainable expansion. It identifies our present wherewithal, allowing us  to plan the exploration of untapped avenues in our Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) while simultaneously implementing sustainable, ecosystem-based management for our current fisheries. This is the first fully digital and geo-referenced Marine Fisheries Census. What new granularity and decision intelligence will the VYAS–BHARAT & VYAS–SUTRA systems unlock that earlier cycles could not ? The biggest strength of this Census is its digital and real-time nature, powered by the VyAS systems. The key innovation is "household-level granularity." Earlier cycles gave us broadly grouped factors or indicators, with less options for integration with similar databases and spatial assessment; MFC 2025 gives us a georeferenced, real-time, and verified picture of each household. VyAS-BHARAT is designed to capture the complete picture—the household's socio-economic status, craft ownership, and access to coastal infrastructure. This is not just data; it's a status appraisal of our entire coastline. VyAS-SUTRA, its complimentary app, is the quality control mechanism. It uses meta-information to ensure the data being populated is plausible, validated, and purified at the source. This combination unlocks real-time decision intelligence. We can see which specific "pockets" of fisher settlements have been historically left out and bring them into the fold. The digital tracking and validation system makes the data immediately usable and reliable for any analysis, from a district-level scheme to a national policy furthering Hon’ble PM Shri Narendra Modi Ji’s vision of leveraging data, digitalisation, and technology to design better policies and ensure transparent, evidence-based governance. How will census insights directly support welfare architecture — including insurance coverage, PMMSY benefit targeting, safety-at-sea systems, housing, and fisherwomen entrepreneurship ? The MFC 2025 is the master database for inclusive delivery of welfare schemes. Targeting Benefits: For PMMSY, housing schemes, or financial aid, the Census provides the precise list of beneficiaries. We will know exactly who owns what, what their financial condition is, and where they live. Inclusivity: The Census is designed to include settlements that may not have been covered yet. This exhaustive mapping ensures that welfare benefits can reach all genuine marine fishers. Fisherwomen Entrepreneurship: By cataloguing the specific skills available in households, we can design pointed schemes to support fisherwomen in alternative livelihoods like mariculture or value-addition, moving them from labourers to entrepreneurs. The exclusive details being collected of the Self-Help Groups active in the fishing villages using VyAS-BHARAT will aid in the expansion of women centric entrepreneurship. Insurance & Safety: By creating a detailed, validated picture of all crafts and fishing assets, we can establish a clear baseline for universal insurance coverage and ensure targeted deployment of safety-at-sea systems. How will MFC 2025 enhance India’s competitiveness in EU, US & Japan seafood markets ? International markets like the EU, US, and Japan demand proof of sustainability and traceability. The MFC 2025 provides the foundation for meeting these expectations. This Census is the foundational layer for a sustainable ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) plan. It gives us a complete, scientifically-consolidated assessment of our fleet's health and capacity. When we can speak loudly in the global arena with robust, homogenous national data, we demonstrate that our fisheries are managed responsibly. This Census is the first step in building a national traceability system—linking crafts, households, and landing centres. This data becomes the verifiable backbone that satisfies international queries and solidifies India's position as a responsible, high-quality seafood supplier. How does MFC 2025 align with India’s vision to emerge as a Top-3 global seafood power — both in sustainable capture fisheries and high-value, value-added exports ? Our vision to make India a top-3 global seafood power rests on two pillars: sustainable capture and high-value diversification. The MFC 2025 is the strategic tool for both. Sustainable Capture & Expansion: The Census assesses the professional fitness of our fleets. It provides the data needed to manage our existing resources sustainably while simultaneously identifying the capacity and requirements for diversification into deep-sea fishing and harnessing the full potential of our EEZ. High-Value Diversification: The future lies in high-value products. The Census identifies the skills and resources available for aquaculture and mariculture, enabling us to strategically pivot and scale up these high-value sectors. In short, the MFC 2025 is the consolidated, scientific roadmap that charts our path. It identifies our strengths, highlights key areas for improvement, and illuminates the precise opportunities we must seize to achieve our national goal. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India is setting new global standards in data-driven governance and inclusive growth through the Marine Fisheries Census 2025. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3442/sacha-hoffmann-santelices-reveals-engineering-behind-komets-irrigation-edge.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3442/sacha-hoffmann-santelices-reveals-engineering-behind-komets-irrigation-edge.html Mon, 01 Dec 2025 12:22:47 +0530 In this exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Sacha Hoffmann Santelices, Managing Director, Komet Irrigation, explains how the company rebuilt its manufacturing philosophy by benchmarking against automotive plants rather than agricultural peers. He outlines how precision engineering, tighter tolerances, and operator-led quality have become strategic differentiators that translate directly into field performance and farmer trust. Sacha highlights Komet’s tightly integrated feedback loops across continents, which allow rapid redesigns and testing updates based on real-world agronomic challenges. He also details how lean culture, digitalized flow systems, and carefully balanced automation help the company maintain industry-leading delivery despite global volatility. Looking ahead to Irrigation 2030, Hoffmann describes investments in advanced materials, digital twins, and cutting-edge laboratories that will anchor the next decade of hydraulic innovation. Raising the Bar: From Irrigation to Industry Leading Manufacturing Komet’s Lienz facility has been compared to automotive plants. What cultural, process, and technology shifts have allowed you to build a factory that outperforms the typical agricultural benchmark ? We began with a cultural reset. Instead of comparing ourselves to other agricultural manufacturers, we benchmarked against the best automotive plants. This changed how we design processes, how we hire, and how we use technology. We invested heavily in process engineering, standardization, and eliminating root causes, not symptoms. Today, repeatability, traceability, and defect-prevention are built into every workflow. That is why our factory performs far above typical agri-equipment standards. Precision as Strategy, Not Just Manufacturing Discipline Your components have tolerances much tighter than industry norms. How has precision become a strategic advantage in the field ? Precision is not just a technical choice; it is a strategic differentiator. Tighter tolerances deliver more consistent water distribution, less variability across environments, and better agronomic reliability. Farmers see this immediately in uniformity and yield. Precision becomes trust, and trust becomes market share. By designing every part to tighter tolerances than the industry expects, we turn manufacturing accuracy into better field performance. Quality at the Source: Redesigning the Role of Operators You say quality must be “produced,” not “controlled.” How do you ensure operators act as problem-solvers rather than machine operators waiting for inspection ? We shifted the operator’s role from a “machine runner” to a “process owner,” anchored on three reinforcing pillars. First, our systems are designed to make errors almost impossible—through poka-yoke mechanisms, real-time SPC dashboards, and standardized work that makes any deviation immediately visible. Second, we hire for problem-solving ability and cross-functional flexibility rather than narrow machine skills, ensuring operators can manage multiple tasks and think beyond their stations. Third, our incentives reward quality and ownership instead of sheer output volume, recognizing those who take responsibility and actively contribute to improvements. This transformation is sustained through continuous training: once operators truly understand that they produce quality rather than merely inspect it, the entire quality curve shifts upstream. Closing the Loop: Farmer Feedback Driving Factory Decisions How does feedback from growers in very different regions influence product design or manufacturing ? We have structured feedback channels across Asia, Latin America, Africa, and the US. This information is reviewed weekly and directly informs our design and production decisions. For example, when farmers in drought-prone areas report behaviour at extremely low pressure, we adjust our testing protocols and may even redesign geometry or materials. The loop from field to factory is short, and agility is one of our biggest strengths. Agility Under Volatility: Supply Chain and Flow Redesign How do you maintain leading on-time delivery despite volatile demand, raw-material swings, and logistics disruptions ? We moved from a “batch and push” model to a flow-driven, demand-synchronized system. We also built dual sourcing for critical components to reduce risk. On the shop floor, we redesigned lines into flexible U-Lines, like Toyota’s approach, so teams can scale up or down quickly while keeping flow stable. At the same time, we accelerated production digitalization, giving us real-time visibility of lead times and faster decision-making. These structural changes allow us to keep industry-leading delivery performance even in unstable market conditions. Lean as a Cultural Engine, not a Toolkit What has been the hardest lean discipline to embed, and how do you maintain weekly improvement momentum ? The hardest discipline is consistency, following standards every day, on every shift. Tools are simple; culture is not. We built a strong shop-floor management system with daily and weekly routines at all leadership levels. Meetings follow a clear, standard format so communication is aligned and transparent. Problems are solved quickly, directly at the source. Our Komet Lean House provides a long-term roadmap with principles, behaviour, and five-year milestones. It keeps our transformation structured and focused. Lean is not a toolkit for us; it is how we think and operate. Innovating Without Over-Automating How do you balance automation with human craftsmanship when small errors can have large field consequences ? We automate where it adds robustness, not where it replaces craftsmanship. For irrigation components, a sub-millimeter misalignment can change the entire hydraulic profile, so we focus on automation that eliminates variability but keep human expertise where judgment is critical. At the same time, automation plays an important ergonomic role: it removes repetitive, physically demanding tasks and allows our people to work in safer, more sustainable conditions. The balance is intentional, automation for stability and ergonomics, skilled people for precision and sensitivity. Preparing for Irrigation 2030: The Next Capability Leap What new competencies are you developing to stay ahead of future irrigation needs ? We are building capabilities far beyond traditional manufacturing: advanced materials science, integrated testing environments, digital twins, and a workforce with stronger analytical and polyvalent skills. A major step is our new laboratory building in Brazil, one of the most advanced in the irrigation industry. It allows high-resolution testing, simulation of extreme conditions, and faster development cycles. Insights from the lab flow directly into product design, material choices, and manufacturing. This keeps us ahead of agronomic and hydraulic challenges and prepares us for the needs of 2030 and beyond. Our goal is clear: build today the capabilities that will define the next decade of irrigation performance. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3428/can-africa-grow-what-it-eats-irris-dr-ismail-maps-new-blueprint-for-rice-self-sufficiency.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3428/can-africa-grow-what-it-eats-irris-dr-ismail-maps-new-blueprint-for-rice-self-sufficiency.html Thu, 27 Nov 2025 18:04:57 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Dr. Ismail Abdelbagi, Principal Scientist and Regional Representative for Africa at International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) lays out a candid assessment of why Africa still imports $8–9 billion of rice annually despite holding the world’s largest reserve of untapped arable land. He argues that the continent’s core bottlenecks—underfunded seed systems, broken value chains, low government investment, and dominance of rainfed, low-productivity systems—must be fixed before any talk of self-sufficiency becomes realistic. Breakthroughs in drought, flood, salinity, and heat-tolerant varieties are finally progressing, but require African-specific breeding pipelines, stronger national programs, and serious funding to reach scale. With consumers shifting toward higher-quality, fortified and convenience rice, Dr. Ismail points to milling modernization, youth-led mechanisation services, and private-sector seed systems as Africa’s next billion-dollar opportunities. Looking ahead to 2035, he says Africa can be food-sovereign and even a net exporter—but only if political stability, modernized policies, and investment-ready ecosystems align to unlock the continent’s true rice potential. Africa’s rice imports have crossed $8–9 billion annually, despite strong policy rhetoric on self-sufficiency. Which structural weaknesses—seed systems, milling capacity, land productivity, or trade dependence—are most urgent to fix, and what would be the fastest win ? Africa has the potential to feed itself and even contribute substantially to global food production and security. The continent holds about 60 to 65 per cent of the global arable lands that has not yet been exploited, with diverse climates suitable for various crops. These vastly underutilized resources position the continent as a future safety valve for global food security. Several general issues are contributing to the inadequate use of these resources such as limited investment in infrastructure including irrigation, modern production and postharvest technologies and marketing platforms.   Several challenges need to be addressed to unlock this potential for the continent to effectively contribute to local and global food security. Governments’ investment in agriculture is still low compared with countries in Asia, mostly less than 1 per cent of their respective GDPs. This is despite the commitment to allocate at least 10 per cent of national GDP to agriculture and rural development, based on Maputo Declaration endorsed by all states in July 2003. Committing to invest in agriculture, including production, postharvest and marketing infrastructure, enabling policy frameworks, providing training and capacity building, and minimizing risks especially for smallholder communities will boost productivity and address food, nutrition and income security, and ensure food sovereignty to avoid dependence on imports in the increasingly becoming less reliable international food market trade. Rice lands and water resources are abundant in Africa, with an estimate of over 300 million ha suitable for rice production, with only about 12 per cent of it currently in use, with low productivity averaging less than half of the world mean production. This is because of dominance of traditional farming approaches, especially in rainfed farming systems that constitutes about 80 per cent of the current rice production areas. Implementing proper policy frameworks that support rapid growth of the rice sector, including adoption of new varieties and modern production practices such as mechanization, effective seed production and delivery systems, access to markets for smallholder farmers (SHFs) to vend their produce at prices that ensures sufficient profits and sustained income, and access to agrochemicals including fertilizers at affordable prices and in time. For this to be realized, rice-based value chains need considerable amendments to reduce intermediaries and provide access of farmers to competitive markets for better choices of prices and to motivate them to produce more. Consolidation of SHF into large fields managed through farmers’ cooperatives and communities will also facilitate implementation of efficient, scale-appropriate technologies to replace the current mostly manual and inefficient production methods being used by smallholders.    Engaging the private sector and other investors is critical for the success of rice-based systems in Africa for effective commercialization of new varieties, development of sustained seed systems and for market access. Intergovernmental arrangements and guidelines are mostly in place but largely not implemented, these agreements can help reduce dependence on import through regional and continental food security and sovereignty. Africa also deserve stronger and binding trade agreements independent of global food and trade instability, although this trade dependence is in part, a result of low production and poor quality of the produce, to meet local requirements. This is further aggravated by political instability and security leading to conflicting investment priorities. Climate shocks are hitting rice hardest in rainfed lowlands, where 80 per cent of Africa’s farmers operate. How close are we to a breakthrough in drought- and heat-resilient varieties that can stabilize yields without costly irrigation infrastructure ? Rainfed rice areas in Africa has not been given sufficient attention for rice production, and farmers still use traditional tools and technologies. This is contrary to the progress made in Asia, where most rainfed areas has been transformed into productive lands, with high and mostly stable yields. The transformation in Asia became feasible after the introduction of varieties that tolerate drought, floods and salt stress, both in coastal and inland areas. This is also coupled with modern production technologies, including water management, proper use of fertilizers, mechanized farming and other suitable cultural practices, with considerable success in increasing and sustaining productivity and income of SHFs in affected areas. Sub-Saharan Africa benefitted little from the stress tolerant varieties developed for South and Southeast Asia, and obviously more efforts need to be devoted to developing and delivering such varieties for Africa to help cope with the vastly worsening climate change adversities. This is only possible through dedicated and well-funded projects to ensure faster progress and impact, especially with the recent scientific developments and use of modern breeding strategies, including molecular tools for genotyping coupled with efficient phenotyping approaches using speed breeding facilities. IRRI started using these technologies in its centralized breeding facilities in Philippines and India, with the products targeting African environment being tested locally in African countries. We are expecting some good progress in the coming few years if resources permit.    IRRI’s Sub1 and salinity-tolerant varieties changed the game in Asia. What are the next frontier traits that Africa needs—especially along the Sahelian dry corridor and coastal deltas facing salinization from sea-level rise? Rice farmers in Africa are facing numerous challenges, including the same issues in Asia – drought, floods and excess salts in soil and water. Besides, other abiotic stresses like iron toxicity in lowlands and nutrient deficiencies due to soil conditions, like phosphorus and zinc deficiencies in uplands, are also serious in some areas. The soils are degraded and deficient in minerals and organic carbon due to continued mining with little replacement. Moreover, the unusual variation in temperatures being experienced, is also leading to considerable reduction in yields, with higher temperatures in some lowland areas and chilling temperatures in highlands. The dominant stains of common rice diseases are sometimes different from those dominating in Asia, making breeding stress tolerant varieties even more challenging.  For these reasons, the stress tolerant varieties released in Asia that made considerable contributions in increasing and sustaining productivity in some countries, like drought, flood and salt tolerant varieties, mostly do not work in Africa, due to variation in other factors, especially diseases and pests and soil conditions. This necessitates transfer of tolerance traits and genes into genetic backgrounds suitable for Africa, and significant efforts and resources need to be devoted to developing such varieties. Due to these and other factors, particularly lack of resources and breeding infrastructure for national breeding programs, our work on developing stress tolerant varieties for Africa has been slow.  The genetic factors responsible for tolerance of drought, floods, salinity and their combinations need to be transferred into varieties suitable for African climate conditions while meeting the consumer and local market requirements and preferences, before they can successfully be commercialized and adopted. This work has been ongoing with some success in releasing few flood-tolerant varieties (with SUB1 gene) in Nigeria and Madagascar, and salt tolerant varieties in Kenya and Tanzania. Some varieties with partial tolerance to drought were released in several countries across SSA. Work is also ongoing to develop varieties that tolerate temperature extremes, where heat waves are becoming common during the season in lowlands and low temperatures in highlands. Ideally, future varieties for Africa should combine tolerance of major abiotic stresses dominating in a particular target region, together with resistance to common diseases. Today’s African consumer is shifting from low-cost staples to quality, fortified, and convenience-driven rice. What innovations in processing, branding, and nutrition could unlock the next billion-dollar opportunity for domestic producers ? Rice is becoming the cereal food of choice in SSA, over the traditional coarse grains like sorghum, millets and teff, because of its palatability, ease of preparation and storage. This shift is driven by several demographic changes, including rapid population growth, with currently over 60 per cent of the population being young, below 25 yrs of age, with shifts in food preferences and conveniences. There is also an exodus of youth to urban areas, seeking better living conditions and opportunities, leaving older generations to deal with farming. This situation can be effectively reversed by providing attractive entrepreneurships through rice farming, such as service provision, especially mechanization, transport and storage, use of IT tools and Apps, seed production and marketing, etc., to make farming more attractive for younger generations. Enabling and supporting such enterprises for young men and women will significantly help in improving productivity and reducing cost of production, while providing employment opportunities for younger generations to stay on farms, reducing pressure on already struggling cities. Similarly, this is opening opportunities for investors and private sector to engage in support provision and even commercial production and marketing. Apparently, all steps along the value chain provide an investment opportunity in most countries. Rice produced locally is not yet competitive with imported rice in most countries, and that is because of many factors, including use of old varieties, poor seed systems to deliver new, improved and high-quality products, poor post-harvest and storage management. Modernizing rice production, including use of quality seeds and sufficient agrochemicals, as well as upgrading the whole value chain, especially postharvest (drying, cleaning, milling, packaging, storage, transport and marketing) will go a long way to make locally produced rice comparable with imported rice, which consumers prefer, especially in urban areas. Subsequently, this will provide good opportunities for investments in Africa. India, for example, could play major roles through bilateral engagements like the existing lines of credit for some countries and through South-South Cooperation and trade agreements. SSA countries can learn a lot from India, through its impressively short journey from being a net importer of rice to the largest exporter in the world within couple of decades. This also provide lots of opportunities for private sector to invest in these value chains, particularly commercial seed production, mechanization and all aspects of post-harvest management. SSA also need to build abilities and investments to adopt climate friendly operations with the expansion of rice industry, and to avoid the issues being experienced in major rice producing countries. The most obvious is the straw and husks burning under intensive rice production systems, involving 2-3 seasons per year, leaving little time to deal with solid wastes. Value addition and processing of these solid wastes can generate more income, e.g. biochar to enrich soil carbon, use in cement industry, mushroom farming, and processed fodder for livestock. Industries involving various products and value addition using rice can also help generate opportunities for commerce and for income. Fragmented national markets raise cost across the value chain. With AfCFTA slowly accelerating, which cross-border rice corridors (e.g., Senegal–Mali, Nigeria–Niger) could emerge as competitive agro-industrial hubs by 2035 ? Most of the intraregional trade in rice and other food commodities in SSA are informal and not well organized to reach their conceivable targets, leading to such fragmented and broken value chains and markets. However, if well-structured and regulated, can play major roles in reducing transaction costs, especially the cost of transport, and could help in resolving issues associated with other non-tariff barriers to encourage and support investments. Several countries in SSA succeeded in substantially increasing their annual rice production and some of them started trading with their neighboring countries. These countries include Tanzania, Madagascar, Nigeria, Mali, Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Ivory Coast. These countries are also exporting rice to their neighboring countries through mostly informal means. Countries that already achieved self-sufficiency, like Tanzania will likely contribute substantially to its neighbors like Kenya and Uganda. If AI-based advisories, digital extension, and climate risk insurance can reduce production uncertainty, what would it take to mainstream data-led farming among smallholders—technology subsidies, telco partnerships, or new farmer-business models ? AI-based advisories, extension apps and climate risk insurance models are important tools that can help speed generation of relevant information, reaching to extension personnel and farmers and minimizing farmers risks by providing insurance against disastrous incidents. AI proved to be transformative in making difficult technologies accessible and convenient and is becoming increasingly useful in agriculture and environment research. Yet its fast and predictive power raises concerns over the likely risks of its use to benefit SHFs, despite its power to speed generating scientific knowledge for the public.   AI already proved its effectiveness in managing commercial farms in developed countries, and similarly could be adapted to farmers needs in SSA, to support decision making based on legacy data, which will considerably reduce investments and time to come up with bundles of interventions fitting specific local contexts, including forecast of catastrophic incidences, like droughts and floods, disease and pests outbreaks that are becoming more frequent with climate change progression. Climate risk insurance is also being accessed by farmers in Asia. Both AI and climate insurance has not been implemented to any scale in SSA to benefit SHFs, providing good business opportunities and new models for farming and food production. However, digital tools in the form of Apps provided through smart phones are being used by extension personnel and even farmers for training and access to information, including input and output market intelligence, nutrient and water management and for managing and forecasting yields, disease incidences etc.; and are likely to be mainstreamed faster than other digital farming technologies in SSA. The use of these tools, however, need to be carefully assessed and regulated to avoid any risks to farmers due to lack of awareness and capacity or due to risks associated with the technology. This is mainly because SHFs have very little resources to avert any incurred risks caused by erroneous or biased data used to generate such models. There are several ethical risks associated with these data-led tools, especially with AI, which has not been rigorously tested and regulated in Africa, including risks associated with data accuracy, availability and privacy, potential loss of jobs and displacement, biased access to information leading to unequal benefits, “digital divide” based on accessibility, etc. Strict ethical frameworks and transparency need to be in place to protect SHFs and reduce their vulnerability. Similarly, crop insurance requires strict guidelines and assessment to ensure accuracy of information and credibility of claims, which in most cases will be outside SHF‘s capacity. Government-led programs equipped with proper monitoring and data collection is necessary for the success of these advisory and support tools, for them to be successfully deployed in Africa, to mainstream data-led farming.  Africa also lacks an effective geospatial system for instantaneous generation of information on potential climate-related disasters, an area that will require infrastructure investment and training. This is critical to provide both farmers and governments with early warnings and to guide decisions that help mitigate any negative consequences. Successful use of these ventures will also require substantial investments in infrastructure and support services, which opens considerable opportunities for investors. Looking ahead to 2035: what does a climate-secure and investment-ready African rice ecosystem look like—and what is the single hardest political or economic barrier standing in its way ? Provided resources and stability within the coming ten years, I expect several countries in Africa to accomplish food self-sufficiency, and some become net exporters of various food staples, including rice. This will likely lead to continental food sovereignty and less dependence on the currently fragile international trade markets, especially exposure to price shocks that become inevitably frequent due to several triggers such as weather calamities, conflicts and political unrests, leading to panic hoarding in some cases. I believe reaching self-sufficiency will depend on how fast countries and regions make progress in critical areas that are currently holding them back, including the following: Significant and consistent government’s investment in food production and related infrastructure for processing, storage and transport. This should include provision of insurance and subsidy options to derisk and protect smallholder farmers, and to provide minimum farmgate prices to sustain farmers’ income and profit and keep them in the market. Fixing and strengthening rice value chains: Currently SHFs in Africa are getting less than half of the proceeds their counterparts are getting in Asia. This is mainly because the existing value chains are broken, mostly unregulated and dominated by intermediaries. Political stability is critical for sound progress and development of the rice agri-food systems. Fortunately, most countries are moving in that direction. This will encourage investors to take critical roles in financing to revolutionize the food value chains, including rice where relatively little is available in international trade market, and with increasing global demands.   Adjusting policies and guidelines to match those in other successful countries like India, to streamline the development and deployment of innovations faster. Current policies in most countries are outdated and are hindering progress, especially those related to release and scaling of new varieties, delivery systems for quality inputs and outputs, and for engaging private sector and investors to provide needed capital and capacity. This is probably the hardest political and economic barrier standing in the way of SSA to be investment ready and to assume its proper role as global food provider. Some countries are already making strides in this direction. Implementation of national and regional strategies that support growth of the rice sector: All major rice producing countries and few regional economic communities in SSA developed their national and regional rice development strategies that detailed the way to achieve their intended targets by 2030, these strategies are yet to be effectively implemented. The regional Economic Communities (RECs: EAC, ECOWAS, IGAD, COMESA, SADC) and the Associated Regional Agricultural Research Networks (e.g. CORAF, ASARECA, CCARDESA) also developed policies that assure and regulate collaboration across borders of neighboring countries, within regions and at the continental scales to allow free adoption of varieties released in a particular country, free cross-border movement of seeds, grains, agrochemicals and knowledge, with no non-tariff barriers. Engaging with countries in Asia through South-South Collaboration (SSC) is also being discussed to enhance learning and exchange, and to facilitate investments for faster growth. An example in this direction is the “Seed Without Borders (SWB) agreement facilitated by IRRI. Most countries in Africa already set policies and guidelines that encourages investments in agriculture and food production, others are on the way. There are dire needs for these investments, especially in upgrading infrastructure, facilitating aggregation of SHFs into commercial entities, provision of modern technologies particularly machinery, agrochemicals and marketing platforms --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3426/future-of-agri-finance-runs-on-mapmycrop-swapnil-jadhav-on-maas-revolution.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3426/future-of-agri-finance-runs-on-mapmycrop-swapnil-jadhav-on-maas-revolution.html Wed, 26 Nov 2025 12:03:09 +0530 In this exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Swapnil Jadhav, Founder & CEO of MapMyCrop, outlines how Monitoring-as-a-Service (MaaS) is redefining agricultural intelligence by shifting the sector from software-based tools to verified, outcome-driven visibility. He explains how MapMyCrop’s 6.2-million farmer validation network, multi-country crop intelligence, and proprietary AI models are solving agriculture’s long-standing “last-mile truth” problem at scale. Jadhav highlights how the company is emerging as the infrastructure backbone for data-driven agri-credit, parametric insurance, and climate-risk modelling as global finance moves toward intelligence-based lending. Swapnil also details how MaaS is becoming central to India’s state-level policy decisions—optimising water, subsidies, and climate governance—while delivering dramatic on-ground impact, such as 60 per cent input savings and 50 per cent quality gains for orange growers. Looking ahead, he positions MapMyCrop as the regulated verification layer of the future, enabling every farm to be visible, every risk quantifiable, and every sustainability claim credible by 2030. MaaS as a Market Redefinition You call MapMyCrop the world’s first Monitoring-as-a-Service platform. What makes MaaS a true category-creation model rather than a rebranded form of agri-tech SaaS ? Monitoring as a service isn't a rebrand—it's a fundamental shift in how agricultural intelligence is delivered. Traditional agri-tech SaaS used to provide software licenses but we at MapMyCrop provide verified, actionable insights as an on-demand service. What makes this category-defining is our Model-as-a-Service architecture: we deploy satellite imagery, weather analytics, and AI-driven crop models continuously across geographies, delivering real-time monitoring without requiring farmers or enterprises to own infrastructure, manage platforms, or interpret raw data. The customers utilize MapMyCrop’s platform for outcomes—verified crop health, yield forecasts, risk alerts—not for software they need to operationalize themselves. That's the core differentiator, we've industrialized agricultural visibility. The Economics of Visibility Satellite intelligence, IoT, and field-level verification are capital intensive. What is the core lever that makes MaaS financially scalable—data monetisation, automation, or enterprise partnerships? Our financial scalability relies on automation and our farmer validation network—not IoT or ground sensors, which are prohibitively expensive at scale. We leverage freely available satellite data and open weather sources, then apply our proprietary AI models to generate insights. The critical lever is our 6.2 million farmer network, which provides ground-truth validation at near-zero marginal cost. This creates a self-reinforcing loop, with more farmers means better model accuracy and then it leads to higher enterprise value which gives us more revenue per insight delivered. We're not just monetizing data but monetizing validated intelligence. Enterprise partnerships with insurers, banks, FMCGs, and governments—provide recurring revenue because they're buying risk reduction and decision confidence, not dashboards. Cracking the Ground-Truthing Barrier Agriculture’s biggest bottleneck is not data scarcity but data validation. How does Map My Crop solve the “last-mile truth” problem that has historically limited insurers, banks, and food companies from making accurate, real-time decisions? You've identified agriculture's Achilles heel. Satellite data is abundant; trust is scarce. MapMyCrop solves the "last-mile truth" problem through our distributed farmer validation network spanning 6.2 million farmers across diverse geographies and partner ecosystems. These farmers act as our ground sensors validating crop stages, stress events, actual yields feeding real-world observations back into our AI models. This isn't crowdsourcing; it's structured validation infrastructure. Combined with our multi-country deployment, we've built longitudinal datasets that capture how crops actually behave across microclimates, soil types, and farming practices, not how models predict they should behave.For insurers, banks, and food companies, this means they can finally underwrite, lend, and procure based on verified field reality, not proxy indicators or farmer declarations. That's the paradigm shift. Transforming Agri-Credit and Insurance As agri-finance shifts from collateral-based lending to data-based underwriting, how is Map My Crop positioning itself as the infrastructure layer for credit scoring, parametric insurance, and climate-risk modelling ? We're positioning MapMyCrop as the rails for data-driven agri-finance, the infrastructure layer that enables lenders and insurers to move from collateral-based to intelligence-based decision-making. Our platform delivers:Our platform supplies granular credit-scoring inputs by analysing farm-level crop health trajectories, input application patterns, and yield-probability curves. It also strengthens parametric insurance design through verified stress-event data—such as drought, excess rainfall, or pest pressure—captured with precise timestamps and geo-tagged evidence. In addition, we deliver forward-looking climate-risk modeling that integrates evolving weather patterns, soil-moisture trends, and crop-vulnerability indices to help institutions anticipate and manage future exposure.Financial institutions don't need to become agronomy experts; they plug into our MaaS layer and receive decision-ready intelligence. As agriculture financing scales to meet the $500B+ credit gap globally, verified monitoring infrastructure isn't optional—it's foundational. Climate, Carbon, and Compliance With Scope 3 emissions reporting and regenerative agriculture commitments rising globally, how central is carbon MRV and climate monitoring to your product roadmap? Do you foresee MaaS becoming mandatory for global agricultural supply chains? Carbon MRV and climate monitoring are central to our roadmap—not as a feature, but as a core product vertical. With Scope 3 reporting mandates tightening and regenerative agriculture commitments accelerating, food companies and agri-processors need verifiable evidence of on-farm carbon sequestration, sustainable practices, and emissions reductions. Our satellite + AI + farmer validation architecture is purpose-built for this: we can monitor practice adoption, quantify biomass changes, and validate interventions at scale without deploying expensive IoT infrastructure. Do I foresee MaaS becoming mandatory? Yes. Within 5 years, major agricultural supply chains will require continuous monitoring and third-party verification of sustainability claims. MapMyCrop is building that verification backbone today. The companies that don't adopt this infrastructure will face compliance risk, supply chain opacity, and premium loss in ESG-conscious markets. Defensibility in a Crowded Tech Landscape With satellite analytics, crop models, and AI becoming increasingly commoditized, what is Map My Crop’s enduring moat—proprietary datasets, longitudinal crop intelligence, integrated advisory, or ecosystem lock-in ? Our moat is longitudinal, validated crop intelligence across diverse agroecologies—and the farmer + partner ecosystem that continuously strengthens it. Satellite access is commoditized. AI models can be replicated. What cannot be easily replicated is: We bring over six years of ground-validated crop performance data spanning multiple crops, geographies, and climate conditions, backed by a 6.2-million-farmer validation network that provides continuous real-time ground truth. This is reinforced by multi-country operational experience—whether it’s understanding how sugarcane behaves differently in Tamil Nadu compared to Uttar Pradesh, or how the economics of orange cultivation diverge between Nagpur and Madhya Pradesh. Added to this is a network of embedded partnerships with state governments, input companies, and financial institutions, creating strong switching costs and making our ecosystem uniquely resilient and hard to replicate. Our defensibility isn't technological—it's systemic. We've built agricultural intelligence infrastructure that gets smarter with every season and every farmer interaction. Competitors can launch satellite analytics; they can't replicate the depth and breadth of our validated knowledge graph. Incorporating the India Success Stories Roorkee Pilot: From Weather Validation to Policy IntelligenceYour Roorkee deployment helped the Uttarakhand government validate weather data and evaluate evapotranspiration and irrigation models. How do you convert such state-level pilots into long-term, scalable policy intelligence platforms across India? The Uttarakhand government engagement demonstrated that accurate, localized intelligence changes policy decisions. By validating weather data and evaluating ET/irrigation models, we helped them move from assumptions to evidence-based resource planning. Converting pilots into long-term platforms requires demonstrating fiscal and governance impact: water savings, subsidy optimization, crop insurance loss reduction. We're now positioned to scale this across Indian states by: We are focused on standardizing our policy intelligence modules—spanning water management, crop diversification, and input subsidy targeting—so they can be seamlessly deployed across diverse agro-climatic contexts. At the same time, we are integrating these modules with the existing workflows of state agricultural departments to ensure smooth adoption and minimal bureaucratic friction. Ultimately, the goal is to demonstrate clear return on investment through pilot results, showcasing improved policy outcomes, reduced wastage, and measurable gains in farmer welfare. State governments are increasingly data-hungry. We're building the agricultural monitoring infrastructure they need for 21st-century governance. Nagpur & MP Oranges: 60 per cent Input Savings, 50 per cent Quality Gains You helped orange growers reduce input costs by 60 per cent and improve fruit quality by 50 per cent.What exactly were the agronomic interventions and digital workflows behind this transformation—and can this model be replicated across India’s horticulture belts at scale? We used satellite and AI-based monitoring to detect crop stress—whether from water, nutrient, or pest issues—well before any visible symptoms appeared. Based on these early signals, we delivered timely and highly specific advisories through our farmer network and partners, prescribing exactly what intervention was needed, when to apply it, and where. This was reinforced by continuous feedback loops on ground performance, allowing us to validate what worked and refine our recommendations on a weekly basis. The result: farmers stopped blanket-spraying and over-fertilizing. They applied inputs precisely when crops needed them, reducing waste dramatically while improving fruit size, color, and brix levels.This model is scalable and replicable because it's not dependent on expensive infrastructure—it's driven by intelligence delivery. We're now deploying similar approaches across pomegranate belts in Maharashtra, mango regions in AP, and banana clusters in Tamil Nadu. India's horticulture sector is $80B+; precision agronomy at MaaS scale can transform its economics. Sugarcane Across Baramati, UP, MP & Tamil Nadu: AI Across Agro-Climates Sugarcane is grown in dramatically different soil, water, and climatic conditions across these states.What did your AI-powered agronomy engine learn from deploying across such diversity, and how does that knowledge strengthen your national and global product strategy? Deploying across such diverse sugarcane regions taught our AI engine something invaluable: crop performance is hyperlocal, but patterns are learnable. We discovered: Water stress manifests very differently across India’s agro-ecologies—Tamil Nadu’s red soils, for instance, face rapid moisture loss and demand tighter irrigation cycles, whereas Uttar Pradesh’s deep alluvial plains retain water longer but are prone to seasonal saturation. Pest pressure, too, follows distinct regional rhythms, with infestation cycles often varying by four to six weeks between zones due to shifts in temperature, humidity, and cropping intensity. Even harvesting windows are no longer dictated by crop age alone; they are increasingly shaped by hyper-local microclimatic cues that determine sugar accumulation, moisture levels, and overall crop quality.This agroecological diversity strengthened our models exponentially. Our AI doesn't just predict sugarcane yields; it understands which interventions work where and why. This cross-geography learning is now our strategic asset—when we enter new crops or new countries, we're not starting from scratch. We're applying battle-tested intelligence frameworks that adapt to local conditions quickly. The 2030 Bet If you had to define Map My Crop in a single sentence in 2030, what would it be? And what bold strategic bet are you making today that the industry still misunderstands or undervalues? If I had to define Map My Crop in 2030 in one sentence: "Map My Crop is the global infrastructure for verified agricultural intelligence—the layer that makes every farm visible, every risk quantifiable, and every sustainability claim credible." The bold bet we're making today that the industry undervalues: That agricultural monitoring will become regulated infrastructure, like financial audits or food safety inspections. Governments, financial institutions, and supply chains will mandate continuous, third-party-verified crop and land-use monitoring within this decade. We're not building a product; we're building the rails that the future agricultural economy will run on. The industry still thinks this is a "nice-to-have" analytics tool. We know it's tomorrow's compliance requirement and competitive necessity. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3425/global-biostimulant-market-reaches-4-47-bn-as-industry-signals-maturity.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3425/global-biostimulant-market-reaches-4-47-bn-as-industry-signals-maturity.html Wed, 26 Nov 2025 08:48:01 +0530 New Dunham Trimmer report reveals sector resilience with 9.9 per cent CAGR projection through 2030 The global biostimulant market has achieved $ 4.47 billion in value with a visible shift from opportunistic to science-based market development, according to Dunham Trimmer's new 2025 Global Biostimulant Market Report, set to be unveiled at the Biostimulants World Congress in Barcelona, December 1-4, 2025. The comprehensive analysis projects a 9.9 per cent compound annual growth rate (CAGR) through 2030—the first time future growth projections have dipped below the double-digit benchmarks historically associated with the broader biologicals sector. However, the firm emphasizes this reflects the natural evolution of a strong market rather than weakness. Dunham Trimmer Market Reports are widely regarded as the most accurate and insightful studies serving the biologicals industries. "Mathematics have been unyielding," said Manel Cervera, Managing Partner and Chief Commercial Officer at Dunham Trimmer, when speaking of the growth rate. "Two factors fundamentally explain this outcome: several of the largest markets are showing early signs of maturity while at the same time the market's critical mass has increased substantially—thus, even when absolute growth remains strong, relative growth rates decline." Notably, the Report reveals that market absolute values will increase by more than half a billion dollars annually through the end of the decade, underscoring the segment's robust (albeit moderating) expansion. Regional Dynamics Reshape Global Landscape Latin America has consolidated its position as the leading market in both value and growth, with Brazil contributing half the region's revenue. The USA maintains its status as the world's largest single market, with Dunham Trimmer citing the significant impact of major U.S. distributors who have evolved into formulation powerhouses. Europe's fourth-place ranking may surprise observers, given European companies' historical leadership in international market development. While Mediterranean markets created major industry leaders, growth elsewhere in the region has not reached critical mass to elevate overall trajectories. However, increasing interest in CE certification could reinvigorate the unified 27-country EU market. Africa remains relatively small overall, with structural constraints—including commercial-channel development and agricultural-system fragmentation—limiting widespread adoption, though DunhamTrimmer anticipates accelerated emergence as a growth pole early next decade. Product Innovation and Application Trends Amino acids reaffirm their leadership position among biostimulant substances, valued for versatility in formulations and strong alignment with circularity principles. Algae extracts also retain premium positioning as the second-largest segment, while humic and fulvic acids remain relevant, particularly as irrigated acreage expands. As a potential game-changer going into the future, Dunham Trimmer highlights the emerging Single Biostimulant Molecule (SBM) market, which is bringing forth products that offer higher specificity and more consistent efficacy (with reduced dependency on agronomic conditions)—potentially unlocking large-scale adoption in row crops and cereals. For the first time, the new Global Biostimulant Report takes on a major innovation by subdividing the market by product use. Spurred by segmentation aligned with EU Regulation 2019/1009 (Fertilising Products Regulation, or FPR) , nutrient use efficiency (NUE) represents the largest biostimulant application category, followed closely by abiotic stress resistance, which is capturing growing market share amid climate challenges in all geographies. Fruits and vegetables remain the primary crop segment, representing over half of total demand, though row crops and cereals are expanding most rapidly—positioned to become the next major growth driver. Despite moderated percentage growth, Dunham Trimmer concludes that the sector's proven resilience through pandemic disruptions and inflationary pressures, combined with emerging technological opportunities, strongly reinforces optimism for biostimulants' role in addressing agricultural challenges while advancing global sustainability objectives. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3414/inside-saf-ambition-reality-gap-aethers-alyssa-norris-on-tech-feedstocks-and-capital-needed-for-real-scale.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3414/inside-saf-ambition-reality-gap-aethers-alyssa-norris-on-tech-feedstocks-and-capital-needed-for-real-scale.html Thu, 20 Nov 2025 12:15:57 +0530 In this exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Alyssa Norris, Director of Sustainability at Aether Fuels, dissects the widening ambition–reality gap in the U.S. SAF Grand Challenge, noting that next-generation pathways beyond HEFA — including Aether’s own Aurora technology — will determine whether the 2030 target can still be met. She argues that the real feedstock battleground is shifting toward waste-carbon streams and electrofuels, where sustainability hinges on rigorous chain-of-custody systems that avoid land-use conflict entirely. Alyssa highlights how airlines are experimenting with new financial instruments, venture funds, and consumer-facing incentives to shoulder SAF’s green premium and expand demand in non-mandated markets. On infrastructure, she warns that storage and blending constraints—more than chemistry—are the immediate choke points, making regional clustering only a partial solution to highly localized bottlenecks. Looking ahead to 2040, Alyssa says SAF’s share of U.S. jet fuel will depend on breakthroughs in feedstock flexibility, robust policy support, and private-sector capital flows that can accelerate scale and close the current ambition–reality divide. I. Scene-Setting: Industry Momentum vs Reality Alyssa, the U.S. SAF Grand Challenge targets 3 billion gallons by 2030. From Aether’s vantage point, does the current pipeline of projects support that scale — or is there a widening ambition–reality gap? It’s an ambitious goal at this point – 2030 is coming up quickly, and there’s still a gap we need to address. Projects moving beyond HEFA are what will make scale possible. HEFA simply isn’t a realistic process for scaling SAF to the volumes we need. As new technologies, like Aether Aurora, come online and the first commercial plants prove the technology is efficient, we can expect a catch-up that will happen very swiftly. The deadline is tight, but with the next generation of projects for production, we have a chance to still meet the 3 billion gallons target and close the gap quickly. II. Feedstock Futures: Who Wins the Supply War Lipids dominate SAF today, but availability caps are unavoidable. Where do you see the most scalable alternatives emerging — ethanol, woody biomass, MSW, algae, or CO₂-derived fuels? Yes, lipids dominate SAF today, but there is a lot of potential in waste carbon as feedstock - industrial waste gas, biogas, and in the near future biomass waste with gasification, like agriculture residue, biomass or MSW.  CO2-derived fuels and ethanol are both progressing quickly — LanzaJet is now producing from ethanol, which is driving momentum, and the technology is there for CO2-derived fuels, however hydrogen and renewable energy costs will need to come down in order to be cost-effective. Algae may have potential, but it needs more development before it can be a truly viable and scalable alternative.  Aether is focused on electrofuels and carbon-recycled pathways. How do you ensure feedstock sustainability and avoid land-use conflicts? Our feedstocks come from waste-carbon only, so they don’t compete with food or feed in any way. We avoid land-use conflicts by only using the waste products – not anything that would have any competition with food, feed, or other commercial uses, and following a robust feedstock chain of custody review.  III. Airlines + Corporates: Who Pays for SAF’s Green Premium Airlines currently pay 2–4x the cost of conventional jet fuel. How are they hedging that exposure today — and what innovative financing instruments (book-and-claim, SAF certificates, ESG-linked offtakes) are emerging? Some airlines are investing in SAF in creative ways. JetBlue, one of Aether’s investors, has its own fund for SAF investment, now known as Sky VC , and several other airlines have similar funds to invest in SAF in different ways.  Airlines are also working very hard to partner with commercial clients who are driving SAF adoption in non-mandated markets. Much of this happens through book-and-claim systems or SAF certificates, which can help spread the cost and create more flexible financing.  Airlines are also investing money and time into education to teach their consumers about SAF and encourage support. Could differentiated branding — “climate neutral class,” for instance — unlock a consumer-led SAF market? Yes, there is a real possibility here. For example, some airlines are discussing and testing consumer incentives such as if you pay for a flight fueled by SAF, you can get upgraded to a different boarding class.  If consumers feel like they are getting direct value from sustainable options, they will choose them.  IV. Infrastructure & Deployment We talk a lot about feedstocks and chemistry, but infrastructure may be the real bottleneck. What elements of the U.S. fuel system require the fastest upgrades — blending hubs, pipelines, storage, certification? Is regional clustering — such as Gulf Coast and Pacific Northwest hub models — a viable pathway to early scale? Depending on which airport you’re sending SAF to, there are different challenges. Storage is one of the most challenging element right now, as some airports are really tight on storage space and have nowhere to store the fuel. Blending is also a challenge, but as SAF becomes more of a reality, the industry is actively working on addressing these issues.  Regional clustering can be helpful, but most situations and challenges need to be addressed on a local level, depending on each region's specific constraints.  V. Strategic Outlook Looking out to 2040, what percentage of U.S. jet fuel demand do you believe SAF can realistically meet — and what breakthroughs are non-negotiable to get there? It’s hard to say a specific percentage at this time. However, we will need breakthroughs in feedstock flexibility or to further unlock readily abundant feedstock. In order to scale production, we also need the proper infrastructure to scale.  If you had one policy lever and one private-sector lever to pull in 2025, what would they be to close the ambition–reality gap? On the policy side, I would love to see continued support at both the local, regional and federal levels for sustainable fuels, and a stronger focus on energy dependence – which should include fuels like SAF.   For Aether, private-sector investment is crucial, so I hope for continued investment in emerging and scaling technologies from the private-sector. We also need more education for corporations on the benefits of sustainability transparency. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3410/digitizing-sugar-guillermo-medina-llarena-on-new-economics-of-agrobiodiversity-and-trade.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3410/digitizing-sugar-guillermo-medina-llarena-on-new-economics-of-agrobiodiversity-and-trade.html Wed, 19 Nov 2025 14:54:42 +0530 Agrospectrum presents an exclusive interview with Guillermo José Medina Llarena, Chief Digital & Analytics Officer at Pantaleon (PSH) and Lead at Stomata Labs, a division of Findability Sciences. In this wide-ranging conversation, he explains how Pantaleon is navigating tightening U.S. tariff-rate quotas by doubling down on customer relationships and quality-driven value addition rather than reactive market shifts. Medina outlines why proximity to the U.S. premium market remains an advantage even as the company expands strategically into Africa and the Middle East, aiming for 20 per cent export share in emerging demand centers by 2030. He delves into Pantaleon’s transformation into a tech-powered sugar major—moving beyond commodity pricing through AI-enabled diversification, green chemistry, and precision fermentation—while strengthening digital traceability and logistics intelligence amid Panama Canal constraints and freight volatility. Looking ahead to 2030, he envisions Pantaleon as a resilient, low-cost regional champion that leverages sugarcane’s carbon-capture efficiency and deep data insights to thrive in a future of declining sugar consumption but rising trade and climate complexity. A. Trade Strategy & Geopolitical Balancing From a portfolio perspective, how is Pantaleon re-optimizing market exposure as the U.S. tightens tariff-rate quotas and renegotiates regional preferences? From a portfolio perspective, Pantaleon views sugar as a foundational commodity where clear, equitable trade rules are essential for all participants. Rather than reactive re-optimization amid U.S. tariff-rate quota tightenings — we emphasize enduring strategies like deepening customer relationships and enhancing product quality through value-added offerings. This ensures resilience without necessitating major shifts, allowing us to sustain exposure while exploring complementary markets. Does the industry need to hedge against structural over-dependence on the United States — or is proximity to a premium market still a net advantage? The sugar industry operates at the intersection of local efficiencies and global dynamics, where hedging against over-dependence on any single market, including the United States, must be weighed against its advantages. Proximity to this premium market—yielding prices around $500+ per ton versus the global average of $400—remains a net positive for swift delivery and higher margins. Our strategy focuses on low-cost production, superior quality, and composure during periods of turbulence, avoiding drastic directional changes that could disrupt established efficiencies. Which emerging demand centers — Asia, the Middle East, Africa — are realistic diversification targets for Central American supply chains? Emerging demand centers in Africa and the Middle East represent viable diversification targets for Central American supply chains, driven by above-average consumption growth and a preference for high-quality products. These regions, with urbanization fueling demand at 4-5 per cent annually, align well with our capabilities; Pantaleon is already active there and plans measured expansion to capture 20 per cent of our export share by 2030, leveraging reliable logistics and certifications to build long-term partnerships. B. Competitive Edge & Supply Chain Intelligence Pantaleon operates one of the most advanced export supply chains in the region. Is digital traceability now a cost of compliance — or a market differentiator capable of commanding premiums? Digital traceability is transitioning from a mere compliance requirement to an industry norm, potentially evolving toward on-chain transactions for enhanced security and collaborative efficiency. While it may not yield sustained premiums or act as a long-term differentiator, we plan to integrate it seamlessly at minimal cost to support operational smoothness, ensuring it complements rather than burdens our processes. How do port infrastructure risks, Panama Canal constraints, and rising freight volatility reshape your contracting strategy ? Port infrastructure risks, Panama Canal constraints (e.g., transits reduced to 33 per day in 2025 due to droughts), and freight volatility (up 20 per cent year-over-year) underscore the need for data-driven agility in contracting. Greater visibility into logistics variables enables superior competitiveness; our approach prioritizes optimizing known factors over predicting unpredictable geopolitical or climatic events, fostering consistent, assertive decisions with a long-term mindset to outperform peers. C. Market Power & Pricing Architecture The global sugar trade is still largely commodity-priced. What is Pantaleon’s strategy to escape the commodity trap through segmentation — such as low-carbon sugar, specialty sweeteners, or identity-preserved lots? To escape the commodity trap, we recognize sugarcane's potential as an efficient energy crop and are advancing diversification through AI-enabled innovations, green chemicals, materials & supplies, and precision fermentation. This positions us to command premiums for segmented products, transforming traditional trade into value-driven opportunities. With volatility accelerating, do you foresee greater mill-consolidation and regional champions emerging to counterbalance Brazil’s dominance? Accelerating volatility is likely to spur greater mill consolidation, as seen in past agricultural trends, while emerging technologies could balance this with tokenization for broader investor alignment. Regional champions may emerge to counterbalance Brazil's 44 million ton dominance, fostering more inclusive and scalable structures in the industry. D. Digital Transformation as Trade Armor Where does AI-driven risk management make the strongest business case today — crop yields, mill efficiency, or market intelligence? AI-driven risk management delivers the strongest business case through holistic value chain optimization—from enhancing crop yields and mill efficiency to securing margins—ensuring comprehensive risk mitigation in volatile environments. E. Security of Supply & Climate Risk The Gulf of Mexico and Central American corridor is increasingly disaster-prone. Could water scarcity force a regional pivot in planting zones — shifting the competitive map of cane production by 2035? In disaster-prone regions like the Gulf of Mexico and Central America, water scarcity (projected to rise by 2050) could necessitate pivots in planting zones by 2035. Enhanced anticipation capabilities will reveal optimal decisions, determining sustained competitiveness in a shifting production landscape. Climate is a non-controllable aspect of farming; thus we focus more in making the best optimization decisions with the given climatic conditions. Closing Vision What does Pantaleon 2030 look like in a world where sugar consumption is falling but trade complexity and technology intensity are rising? Pantaleon in 2030 envisions a resilient leader preserving core competencies in cane production, harvesting, sugar recovery, and logistics while embracing technology-driven diversification into AI, new chemistry, materials, and food innovations. In a world of declining sugar consumption but rising trade complexity, sugarcane's inherent carbon-capture efficiency will remain a planetary advantage, enabling harmony and efficacy in sustainable operations. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3396/brazilian-bioinput-industry-faces-decisive-moment-as-regulatory-framework-takes-shape-says-abinbio.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3396/brazilian-bioinput-industry-faces-decisive-moment-as-regulatory-framework-takes-shape-says-abinbio.html Mon, 17 Nov 2025 10:49:19 +0530 Brazil’s biological inputs industry is entering a decisive regulatory phase as the Ministry of Agriculture drafts rules under the newly approved Civil Framework for Biological Inputs. ABINBIO, which has secured a central role in the negotiations, is pushing for unified industry participation to shape regulations, correct outdated tax classifications, and unlock federal financing mechanisms. The association is also working to position Brazil globally, leveraging its biodiversity to expand international markets for biocontrol and biofertiliser products. With the domestic market expected to double to over $ 3 billion by 2030 and biologicals rapidly replacing synthetics, ABINBIO leaders warn that industry unity now will determine competitiveness for decades. Brazil's biological inputs industry stands at a critical juncture as regulators begin drafting rules that will govern one of the world's fastest-growing agricultural sectors, according to the Brazilian Association of Bioinput Industries (ABINBIO). The trade group is urging companies to unite during what it characterizes as a "historic window" that will determine competitive dynamics for decades. "We are at a historic moment. The rules of the game are being discussed now and will be established, with the Ministry of Agriculture as protagonist," said Auro Ruschel, ABINBIO's legal director and head of Auro Ruschel Advogados Associados, a firm specializing in agricultural input regulation. "The industry needs to unite around ABINBIO to participate in this public debate and build regulation that serves the sector's interests." Regulatory Architecture Under Construction The urgency stems from ongoing Ministry of Agriculture technical working groups tasked with implementing Brazil's newly approved Civil Framework for Biological Inputs. ABINBIO, which secured a seat at the negotiating table, successfully inserted key provisions into the legislation and now faces the challenge of translating broad legal principles into operational regulations. The association's "purposeful bias," as Ruschel describes it, focuses on pragmatic problem-solving for an industry previously constrained by regulatory frameworks designed for synthetic agrochemicals rather than biological alternatives. Since its official launch, ABINBIO has expanded beyond core regulatory advocacy to address taxation classification issues with the Federal Revenue Service, where biological products remain erroneously categorized alongside chemical pesticides for customs and tax purposes—a legacy classification system that creates compliance burdens and competitive disadvantages. Financial Infrastructure and Global Positioning The organization is simultaneously pursuing access to federal incentive mechanisms, including financing lines from FINEP (Financier of Studies and Projects), EMPRAPII (Brazilian Company for Research and Industrial Innovation), and BNDES (National Bank for Economic and Social Development), which historically favored established chemical input manufacturers. International market development represents another strategic priority. "The bioinput industry in Brazil, due to our country's characteristics, can adapt and sell products for all biomes. Internationalization is fundamental for opening new markets," Ruschel explained, highlighting Brazil's unique biodiversity advantage in developing biological solutions applicable across diverse global agricultural systems. Despite its recent formation, ABINBIO has secured institutional recognition typically reserved for established trade associations. "Despite being a young association, ABINBIO already has relevant seats within the federal government and public debate, alongside traditional entities. We've achieved the same spaces and speaking opportunities despite our youth," Ruschel noted. Market Dynamics Drive Urgency The stakes justify the mobilization effort. According to Dunham Trimmer, an international bio-intelligence agency, Brazil's biological inputs market currently exceeds 1.5 billion and is projected to surpass 3 billion by decade's end. The country accounts for over 20 per cent of global biocontrol growth between 2021 and 2030. The sector comprises approximately 145 companies, with significant expansion anticipated as biological products increasingly substitute synthetic chemicals—a global trend driven by sustainability mandates and consumer preferences. Ruschel projects substantial market amplification through 2032, characterizing biological inputs as "a highly relevant, highly sustainable economic vertical with a significant growth trajectory." Coordination Imperative Ruschel's message echoes ABINBIO President Marcelo de Godoy Oliveira's positioning, distilled to a single directive: "Unity." "All sector companies must understand that the rules of the game are being discussed now. It is imperative that all input industries pay attention and participate," Ruschel warned. Participation channels through ABINBIO membership, which enables companies to integrate into regulatory discussions, designate board representatives, and collaborate on technical arguments presented to government working groups. The objective, Ruschel emphasized, centers on "building regulation that serves industry interests, without creating market reserves or impediments, but allowing the industry to grow increasingly." The call reflects recognition that regulatory architecture established during this formative period will either facilitate or constrain an industry positioned as a cornerstone of sustainable Brazilian agriculture. As synthetic input substitution accelerates globally, Brazil's regulatory approach could establish templates for emerging markets while determining whether domestic producers capture value or cede market share to international competitors operating under different frameworks. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3380/europe-leads-asia-accelerates-suzanne-mckenzie-on-global-push-for-recycled-jet-fuel.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3380/europe-leads-asia-accelerates-suzanne-mckenzie-on-global-push-for-recycled-jet-fuel.html Mon, 10 Nov 2025 12:16:11 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Suzanne McKenzie, Sales Director, Lifecycle Oils Ltd, UK, explains how Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) produced from used cooking oil goes through advanced filtration, hydrotreating, and hydrocracking before being blended to meet strict jet specifications—distinctly different from fossil fuels derived via crude oil distillation. She notes that second-generation SAF from waste streams can slash lifecycle emissions by up to 80 per cent versus fossil fuel, without competing with food crops or land. Mandates in the UK, EU and Asia are accelerating adoption, though scaling production and infrastructure remains a major challenge. Suzanne highlights constraints around finite UCO supply, price gaps, and rapidly growing SAF demand—forecast to reach 15 million Mt by 2030 versus ~1 million Mt today. Looking ahead, she sees diversification into algae oils, tall oil, cover crops and Power-to-Liquid e-fuels as essential to achieving aviation’s Net Zero ambitions. I. SAF Production & Environmental Impact From Fryer to Fuel: Could you walk us through the lifecycle of SAF made from used cooking oil, highlighting the key technological and operational steps that differentiate it from conventional jet fuel? First, we collect the used cooking oil (UCO) from across the food industry, including food manufacturers, quick service restaurants and food service providers, as well as from household waste sites around the UK. This is then transported to our processing plant in Wednesbury.We then filter the UCO to remove all contaminants and process it using a unique multi-stage filtration and settling process to turn it into a specification suitable for use as a feedstock for producing SAF, HVO, Biofuels and our patented LF100 biofuel. The pre-treated UCO is then hydrotreated – a process where hydrogen is used to remove the oxygen from the free fatty acids, converting the carbon bonds into long-chain hydrocarbons. The hydrocarbons are then hydrocracked to break them down into shorter molecules through isomerisation, which is critical for creating a fuel with the right freezing point and combustion properties for use in jet engines. The resulting fuel is then blended with conventional jet fuel to the required level to meet to required specification for SAF. Conventional jet fuel is created by fractional distillation and cracking, where the oil is heated and separated into different fractions, including one that can be used as jet fuel.Sustainability Metrics: How does SAF made from waste streams like used cooking oil perform in terms of carbon intensity, lifecycle emissions reductions, and broader environmental benefits compared to traditional fossil jet fuels? The sustainability credentials of SAF depend heavily on the feedstock used to create it. First-generation SAF – made from virgin crops like palm oil or rapeseed oil – come with inherent trade-offs from a sustainability perspective. Growing feedstock crops for SAF can be carbon-intensive and are associated with deforestation, land conversion, biodiversity loss, and high water consumption. They require agricultural land, which means directly competing with the food chain for resources. Second-generation SAF, like UCO processed by Lifecycle Oils, offers substantial environmental advantages by avoiding these issues entirely. There’s no extra land required, and no additional resources required to grow new crops. It’s repurposing a waste stream, and one we have great access to as we’re partnered with 96% of household recycling centres across the UK. As a result of using previously waste materials, UCO-derived biofuels can slash lifecycle carbon footprints by an estimated 80 per cent when compared to conventional fuels, and 40 per cent when compared to first-generation biofuels.II. Industry Adoption & Market DynamicsAdoption Trends: How quickly are airlines and airports embracing SAF, and what patterns are you seeing in Europe versus other regions? Are current mandates and voluntary targets driving meaningful uptake? There is a clear trend – countries worldwide see SAF as the best way to cut aviation emissions in the mid-term.As a result, airlines and airports worldwide are steadily increasing their SAF use, with the SAF mandates driving much of the uptake – especially in Europe and the UK, where we already have a 2 per cent SAF mandate in place for 2025, which will rise to 6 per cent and 10 per cent respectively by 2030.Across the Asia-Pacific region, we’re also seeing new policies, targets and emerging targets on SAF. Japan is exploring a 10 per cent SAF mandate by 2030 for departing flights, and Singapore is introducing a 1 per cent SAF target for 2026, which could rise to 3-5 per cent by 2030. South Korea and India are both considering a 1 per cent target for 2027. In terms of voluntary uptake, we’re seeing commitments tied to net-zero pledges from airlines, but it’s the mandates that are likely to drive real change.Feasibility & Scalability: SAF adoption faces technical and logistical challenges. From your perspective, what are the main bottlenecks in scaling production, blending, and distribution for commercial aviation? One key challenge is bringing production capacity on board to meet demand! Current forecasts predict that by 2030, global demand for SAF will be around 15 million Mt, and by 2035, this looks set to reach 40 million Mt. In 2024, global SAF production was around 1 million Mt, with current predictions suggesting global capacity will only grow to around 18 million Mt by 2035. There’s a big gap!There are also challenges in developing the blending and depot infrastructure at major airports, so that the SAF can be integrated into existing supply chains.From a UCO perspective, the challenge is supply – UCO is a finite and increasingly in-demand resource for all kinds of biofuels. While there is room to scale, it’s not infinite, and will only ever form part of the SAF mix. The final challenge is price. SAF is currently more expensive than jet fuel – and significantly so! In a fuel-hungry industry where profit margins are tight, and are currently focused on securing the cheapest fuel possible, the market is naturally resistant to more expensive solutions, however much better for the planet. III. Policy & Regulatory LeversGovernment Role: How critical are policy incentives, mandates, and regulatory frameworks in accelerating SAF adoption? What works best: carbon pricing, blending obligations, or subsidies for feedstock collection? Blending mandates are already creating a guaranteed market for SAF and accelerating adoption worldwide. It seems likely these mandates will be the main drivers over the coming decade.Carbon pricing is an interesting prospect that could have a meaningful impact on the price difference between SAF (and especially UCO-derived SAF) and conventional jet fuel, which could make it more appealing to airlines.Tax subsidies definitely make a big difference – the US Sustainable Aviation Fuel tax credit directly reduces the final cost of SAF, making it more competitive and attractive to airlines. In the UK, there is talk of a revenue certainty mechanism, which could also stabilise costs and attract future investment into the SAF market.Lifecycle Oils collects UCO from takeaways, high-end restaurants, high street chains, industrial facilities and food manufacturers of all shapes and sizes, so naturally we’d love subsidies on collection – but given the rising demand and limits on supply for UCO globally, it seems unlikely that this would be introduced.Cross-Border Policy Alignment: Given aviation’s global nature, how do differing regulatory regimes in the EU, UK, and Asia impact the economics and deployment of SAF produced from recycled oils? The fuel markets are all connected, and there are so many different factors in play (tax credits, mandates, tariffs, lifecycle emissions criteria, etc.) across the globe that the picture becomes very complex regarding market demands and incentives to supply.In terms of the global UCO market, we’re already seeing some impact in terms of reduced overseas supply, as Asian countries increase biofuel blends and consider SAF mandates.Asia is a key source of UCO, but as Asian countries (e.g., Japan, India, Singapore) introduce their own SAF mandates, they will increasingly seek to utilise their domestic UCO supply. This will have a knock-on effect in Europe and potentially drive up prices as supply constraints come into play.IV. Economics & Supply Chain Cost and Competitiveness: SAF is often more expensive than conventional jet fuel. How do supply chain constraints—such as feedstock availability, collection logistics, and refinery scale—affect long-term pricing and commercial viability ?With oil prices depressed, and aviation fuel exempt from tax in many cases, gaining parity with jet fuel prices is a real challenge – especially if the projections are right, and future demand for SAF significantly outstrips supply. There is a chance that future carbon pricing, or the introduction of a jet fuel tax, could close this gap – but the commercial viability of SAF is primarily supported by mandates, and a global desire to decarbonise aviation and achieve ‘Jet Zero.’Investment & Industry Partnerships: What role do corporate offtake agreements, private investment, and airline collaborations play in scaling SAF production sustainably and profitably?Long-term corporate agreements help guarantee demand, which is essential for gaining finance for production projects and for sustainable profitability.Aligning with corporate sustainability objectives, like reducing Scope 3 emissions, can also support scaling SAF production. If decarbonising aviation is a real priority, then SAF is the most realistic and implementable solution we have. ‘Book and claim’ credits or premiums systems can be effective ways of subsidising SAF production, while helping corporates to fulfil sustainability ambitions. Global Potential: Used cooking oil is a finite resource. Beyond this feedstock, what other waste or renewable sources hold the most promise for SAF at scale, and how can Lifecycle Oils help lead that diversification ? At Lifecycle Oils, our focus is on UCO – it’s about utilising a waste product to create sustainable fuels as part of a more circular economy, and our mission is to continue to scale this model by engaging with companies across the food industry and beyond.Ultimately though, the supply is finite – and if we’re going to deliver SAF at scale, it will only be part of the solution, and to meet the mandate, we will need to increase the feedstocks used. In terms of more sustainable solutions, using oilseed cover crops is an option, and there is real potential in oils derived from algae – though this is still in the very early stages of development. Tall Oil is another good source of feedstock to produce fossil-free biofuel. It is crude tall oil (CTO) and a byproduct of the wood pulping process. This demonstrates a pathway for producing SAF from a renewable, forestry-based feedstock, which can reduce lifecycle emissions compared to traditional jet fuel.  Alternative fuel options and SAF alternatives like synthetic Power-to-Liquid (PtL) synthetic e-fuels, or even the introduction of hydrogen flight, could also be part of the long-term solution to decarbonisation. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3377/2030-vision-arya-ag-aims-for-worlds-most-climate-resilient-grain-network.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3377/2030-vision-arya-ag-aims-for-worlds-most-climate-resilient-grain-network.html Fri, 07 Nov 2025 12:58:40 +0530 In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Shenoy Mathew, Chief Sustainability Officer, Arya.ag, highlights how its SmartAG Award 2025 is more than recognition—it is validation of a climate-resilient grain commerce model already operating at national scale. By embedding sustainability into everyday storage, finance, and trading systems, the company is delivering measurable climate gains and income stability to over 800,000 smallholder farmers across 425+ districts. Women-led Smart Farm Centres and technologies like the AryaQ AI grain quality device are transforming trust, transparency, and decision-making in rural markets. With patient, impact-aligned capital and global adaptation potential, Arya.ag is positioning itself at the nexus of profitability and planetary resilience. Looking ahead to 2030, the company envisions climate risk management and data-backed empowerment as built-in features of every grain transaction—setting a new benchmark for post-harvest systems globally. From Recognition to Scale: Arya.ag has been recognised with the SmartAG Award 2025 for embedding climate resilience into India’s grain commerce. Awards are accolades—but how does this recognition translate into real-world acceleration for farmers, investors, and the broader agri-value chain? The recognition affirms that climate resilience can be built into agricultural systems that already function at scale, without requiring parallel structures or new layers of complexity. What it brings is not just visibility, but validation of a model that integrates profitability, inclusion, and environmental responsibility into the everyday mechanics of post-harvest grain management. Arya.ag has focused on embedding sustainability into existing systems, ensuring that storage, finance, and market access deliver environmental returns as naturally as they deliver economic ones. Over the past year alone, our decentralised network helped avoid post-harvest loss of more than 210,320 metric tonnes of foodgrain. Preserving this grain prevented an estimated 233,603 tonnes of carbon emissions, conserved 91.4 billion litres of water, and eliminated the need for 16,826 tonnes of fertiliser. These outcomes are not incidental, they are a direct result of improving storage and market access for farmers across more than 425 districts. For farmers, this translates into fewer distress sales and greater flexibility in timing their transactions. For investors, it signals a scalable, data-driven model that aligns impact and return. And for the broader agri-value chain, it shows that climate responsiveness does not have to rely on specialised interventions, it can emerge through operational efficiency and deeper participation from the smallest actors in the system. The Smallholder Lens: India’s agricultural backbone remains smallholder farmers, many of them climate-vulnerable. How do Smart Farm Centres bridge the gap between hyperlocal realities—erratic rainfall, fragmented landholdings—and advanced technologies like AI, drones, and real-time weather advisories? Smallholder farming operates within constraints that are both structural and climatic. The Smart Farm Centres were designed to respond to these conditions by creating access to technology and information where they are needed most. Each centre serves as a rural hub that connects farmers to services such as soil testing, drone spraying, and hyperlocal weather forecasting. These services are not standalone activities; they function together to improve decision-making at every stage of the cropping cycle. For Instance In Bundelkhand, farmers have used weather data from these centres to plan their harvest windows and reduce exposure to untimely rainfall. In Sitapur, drone spraying has improved the precision of pesticide application, lowering costs and minimising environmental exposure. In districts of eastern Uttar Pradesh, soil testing has helped farmers calibrate their fertiliser use more efficiently. The centres are operated by women from the same communities who are trained to deliver these services, which ensures trust, reliability, and continuity. This model allows climate-relevant tools to become part of everyday practice rather than occasional interventions. Tech as a Trust Builder: AryaQ’s AI-powered grain quality device brings radical transparency to procurement and pricing. In a market often plagued by mistrust and middlemen, how is technology reshaping the farmer–buyer relationship, and do you see this model becoming a new standard across emerging markets? Trust in agricultural markets has historically depended on physical inspection and subjective assessment. AryaQ introduces a data-driven approach to measuring grain quality that makes the process faster, more reliable, and easier to replicate across locations. The device uses computer vision to assess factors such as grain size, breakage, and the presence of fungal elements. The results are available instantly, even in areas without continuous connectivity, which makes it suitable for remote markets. As both sides have access to identical data, there is greater transparency in pricing and fewer disputes. This change strengthens relationships and encourages repeat transactions. Given its adaptability, AryaQ can be calibrated for a range of commodities and geographies, which makes it relevant beyond India’s borders. The Women-led Edge: The Smart Farm Centres are run by women Community Value Chain Resource Persons. Beyond inclusion, what structural advantages does a women-led model bring to grain commerce, and can this approach be scaled without diluting impact? The presence of women as operational leaders within Smart Farm Centres has added a layer of trust and continuity that is essential in rural systems. These women are drawn from the same localities they serve, which gives them a strong understanding of the agricultural calendar, the challenges of smallholder farming, and the patterns of local trade. Their involvement has led to greater participation from farmers and has improved the adoption of services related to quality assessment, sorting, and storage. In Maharashtra, women-led sourcing units have reduced produce rejection rates by almost 30 percent at the collection stage. This improvement directly affects farmer incomes and reduces post-harvest losses. To ensure that the model grows responsibly, Arya.ag invests in training and performance monitoring, with a focus on building long-term professional capacity. As the network expands, the objective is not only to increase numbers but also to preserve the quality and reliability that make this structure effective. Climate and Capital: You’ve positioned Arya.ag at the intersection of climate resilience and economic resilience. What kind of capital—impact, venture, institutional—is best aligned with scaling this model, and how do you balance profitability with sustainability when most agri-tech startups struggle to break even? Capital that understands the cycles and risks of agriculture is most suitable for models such as ours. Arya.ag’s operations are built on commercially viable services that reduce inefficiencies rather than depend on temporary funding. We manage close to seven million tonnes of agricultural produce through our decentralised network across more than 425 districts, which provides both reach and depth in understanding rural markets. The capital that aligns with this vision is patient and impact-oriented but also disciplined about financial performance. Investors such as responsAbility and the US International Development Finance Corporation have supported Arya.ag because they recognise that environmental benefits and economic efficiency emerge together when systems are designed well. The balance between sustainability and profitability is achieved by ensuring that each intervention, whether in storage, finance, or quality assessment creates measurable value for every participant in the value chain. Global Relevance: With 11,000 digitised warehouses and a network spanning 800,000 farmers, Arya.ag is already India’s largest integrated grain commerce platform. How transferable is your Smart Farm Centre model to Africa, Southeast Asia, or Latin America, where climate shocks and smallholder fragmentation mirror India’s challenges? The fundamental issues faced by smallholders in India are similar to those observed in several other parts of the world. Limited storage near farms, inconsistent quality standards, and poor access to working capital are common constraints. The Smart Farm Centre model is structured to be modular so that it can adapt to different agricultural and climatic contexts. Each component such as soil testing, digital quality assessment, or credit linkage can be introduced independently and scaled based on demand and infrastructure. In collaboration with partners in East Africa, we are exploring ways to adapt this model to local crops and climatic conditions. The ability to train community-based facilitators and the flexibility of tools like AryaQ make replication feasible. However, success depends on tailoring delivery mechanisms to local institutions and farmer networks, rather than exporting the Indian experience directly. The aim is to share knowledge and process design while allowing each geography to build its own form of resilience. The Long View: If we fast-forward to 2030, what does success look like for Arya.ag? Is it about doubling farmer incomes, embedding climate risk management into every transaction, or becoming a blueprint for grain systems transformation globally? By 2030, success for Arya.ag would be defined by the strength and stability of the systems that smallholders rely on after harvest. It would mean that every farmer using our platform can store their produce safely, understand its quality, access credit based on that stored value, and sell it when conditions are favourable. These capabilities lead to income stability and reduced exposure to climate and market shocks. At present, Arya.ag serves more than 800,000 farmers through a network of 11,000 digitised warehouses and over 1,600 Farmer Producer Organisations. Over the next five years, our focus is on deepening these relationships and embedding data-backed transparency across every transaction. The goal is not to create a blueprint for others to copy but to demonstrate that a balanced system, one that values both livelihoods and resources can endure and grow in the face of climate uncertainty. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3374/role-of-mancozeb-in-safeguarding-grapes-global-food-security.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3374/role-of-mancozeb-in-safeguarding-grapes-global-food-security.html Thu, 06 Nov 2025 12:33:57 +0530 The agriculture sector, known for its high-value fruits and significant export potential, is facing a convergence of agronomic, economic, and regulatory pressures. On October 13, a distinguished panel of scientists, industry leaders, and regulatory experts convened virtually to discuss the multifaceted role of Mancozeb in sustainable agriculture, in Agrospectrum webinar titled - The Future of Mancozeb: Science, Stewardship, and Global Food Security. The webinar examined the fungicide’s scientific attributes, its integration into disease management programs, regulatory trends, and its broader implications for farm profitability and food security.  The virtually held discussions underscored that fungicide stewardship is no longer merely a technical matter; it is intricately linked to growers’ livelihoods, market access, and global food stability.  Economic Lessons from Disease Modeling The session commenced with a presentation by Dr Kaushik Banerjee, FRSC, FNAAS, Director of ICAR-NRC for Grapes and Honorary Professor at Queen's University Belfast and the University of Laval, Canada. Dr Banerjee framed the discussion by highlighting the economic and systemic impacts of grape disease outbreaks. Using advanced agronomic modeling, he demonstrated that fungal infections, particularly under high-pressure disease scenarios, can trigger cascading effects on farm profitability, regional supply chains, and even international markets. His analysis emphasised that targeted fungicide programs, including those employing Mancozeb, are not merely preventive measures at the field level but essential tools for stabilising grower income and maintaining global food security. "Every outbreak of grape disease is not just a threat to individual farms—it sends shockwaves through regional supply chains, export markets, and farmer livelihoods. Strategic fungicide programs, including judicious use of Mancozeb, are critical investments. Timely, science-driven interventions safeguard yields, stabilize income, and ensure that agriculture continues to feed both people and economies sustainably." – Dr Kaushik Banerjee, FRSC, FNAAS, Director of ICAR-NRC for Grapes and Honorary Professor at Queen's University Belfast and the University of Laval, Canada Dr Banerjee illustrated that under certain high-incidence conditions, the absence of an effective fungicide program could result in yield losses exceeding 30 to 40 percent, with downstream effects on pricing, processing capacity, and export viability. He stressed that investments in fungicide programs, though an upfront cost, are economically justified when considering the potential revenue losses avoided and the risk mitigation achieved.  Ensuring Safe Access to Mancozeb Worldwide Following Dr Banerjee’s presentation, the discussion shifted to regulatory science and risk assessment. Richard Mills, Global Director of Trade and Government Affairs at UPL, provided a comprehensive overview of the evolving global regulatory landscape for fungicides. Mills articulated the distinction between risk-based and hazard-based regulatory frameworks, emphasising that risk-based assessments evaluate the probability and impact of exposure under realistic use conditions, whereas hazard-based approaches may restrict chemicals based solely on intrinsic properties without contextual application data. He further elaborated on the importance of personal protective equipment compliance, residue monitoring, and data-driven stewardship programs to maintain both domestic and international access to Mancozeb. "Regulatory frameworks are only as effective as the practices behind them. Risk-based assessments let us evaluate real-world exposure, while hazard-based approaches can be overly restrictive. By combining compliance, PPE, residue monitoring, and proactive stewardship, we ensure safe, responsible use of Mancozeb, protecting both public health and growers’ market access across diverse international jurisdictions." –Richard Mills, Global Director of Trade and Government Affairs at UPL Mills highlighted that harmonizing regulatory compliance across countries is essential for exporters, as maximum residue limits (MRLs) vary widely across jurisdictions. He stressed that proactive engagement with regulators, transparent record-keeping, and adherence to recommended application practices are vital to safeguarding market access while ensuring public safety.  How Tech is Revolutionising Disease Control Building upon the regulatory perspective, Sandeep Jagtap, Senior Business Development Manager at Ross LifeScience, addressed the integration of Mancozeb into Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies and the role of digital agriculture. Jagtap elaborated on how precision tools, including digital disease forecasting models, remote monitoring platforms, and app-based advisory services, allow growers to optimise fungicide use, ensuring applications are timely and necessary, thereby minimizing both economic and environmental costs. He underscored that combining chemical interventions with cultural practices such as canopy management, crop rotation, and resistant varieties enhances the sustainability and effectiveness of disease control programs. "Integrating Mancozeb into IPM isn’t just about spraying—it’s about precision, timing, and sustainability. Digital tools like disease forecasting and remote monitoring help growers apply fungicides only when necessary, reducing costs and environmental impact. When combined with cultural practices like canopy management and resistant varieties, these strategies optimize yield, protect the ecosystem, and make viticulture smarter for every scale of farming." – Sandeep Jagtap, Senior Business Development Manager at Ross LifeScience By demonstrating case studies where digital tools helped reduce fungicide usage without compromising yield, Jagtap highlighted that technology adoption in viticulture can be scaled to support both large commercial growers and smaller farmers, providing actionable insights that translate into improved farm profitability and environmental stewardship.   Collaborative Approaches to Fungicide Stewardship Concluding the speaker presentations, Amiya Kumar Bartia, Strategic Marketing Head at Indofil, shared the industry’s perspective on stewardship and sustainable crop protection strategies. Bartia emphasized that ensuring responsible access to Mancozeb requires multi-level collaboration among growers, industry stakeholders, and regulators. He described initiatives such as educational outreach programs, grower training sessions, and digital monitoring tools that reinforce proper application practices and adherence to safety protocols. "Responsible access to Mancozeb demands collaboration across growers, industry, and regulators. Stewardship isn’t just compliance—it’s a strategic imperative. Through training, outreach, and digital monitoring, we ensure safe, effective application while safeguarding market continuity. By building trust and engagement, we balance crop protection, environmental responsibility, and social accountability, promoting sustainable practices in high-value horticulture." –Amiya Kumar Bartia, Strategic Marketing Head at Indofil Bartia noted that stewardship programs are not merely regulatory obligations but strategic imperatives that secure long-term market continuity and support sustainable agricultural systems. By fostering trust and engagement between stakeholders, the industry aims to balance crop protection needs with environmental and social responsibility, illustrating a pragmatic approach to chemical management in high-value horticulture. Following the formal presentations, the webinar hosted a dynamic Q&A session, providing participants an opportunity to engage directly with the expert panel. Key questions centered on practical challenges, including managing resistance to single-site fungicides, navigating divergent international MRLs, adopting digital forecasting tools, and understanding the cost-benefit dynamics of fungicide programs. In addressing resistance concerns, Dr Banerjee recommended adherence to rotation strategies and integration of multi-site fungicides like Mancozeb into IPM programs. Richard Mills responded to regulatory queries, emphasizing the necessity of maintaining meticulous residue records and proactively engaging with trade authorities to navigate changing international standards. When participants inquired about digital adoption among smallholder farmers, Sandeep Jagtap highlighted the scalability of mobile-based platforms and cloud-supported advisory services that enable data-driven decision-making even for resource-constrained growers. Dr Banerjee quantified the economic benefits of preventive fungicide programs, showing that costs incurred are substantially offset by avoided yield losses, revenue stabilization, and mitigation of downstream market risks. Finally, Bartia discussed the components of effective stewardship, including transparent application practices, grower partnerships, and continuous monitoring, which collectively ensure responsible fungicide use while safeguarding the environment. Several overarching themes emerged from the discussion. First, Mancozeb remains an indispensable tool in grape disease management, particularly in regions facing high disease pressure. Its multi-site activity not only provides immediate disease control but also preserves the efficacy of other fungicides, underpinning the sustainability of crop protection programs. Second, agronomic and economic modeling validates the cost-effectiveness of fungicide interventions, highlighting that upfront expenditure on well-planned programs mitigates larger financial risks from yield losses, quality deterioration, and compromised market access. Third, regulatory vigilance and proactive stewardship are crucial to ensuring safe, compliant access to fungicides in a rapidly evolving global trade environment. Fourth, the integration of digital agriculture and IPM enhances both efficacy and sustainability, enabling precision application, reducing environmental impact, and supporting data-driven farm management. Finally, collaborative industry frameworks, which align growers, regulatory bodies, and companies, are essential for maintaining market continuity, promoting responsible chemical use, and reinforcing sustainable agricultural practices. The webinar also underscored the broader implications of fungicide management beyond the vineyard. By mitigating disease losses and supporting yield stability, effective fungicide programs contribute to food security, particularly in regions dependent on horticultural exports for economic and nutritional resilience. In addition, the discussions highlighted that responsible fungicide stewardship intersects with environmental goals, including reduction of chemical overuse, protection of soil and water quality, and mitigation of pesticide resistance. As the agricultural sector navigates the dual pressures of climate variability and intensifying disease outbreaks, the integrated strategies discussed in this webinar offer a blueprint for sustainable crop protection. Participants and speakers alike noted that the convergence of scientific knowledge, regulatory compliance, economic modeling, and digital innovation is reshaping the landscape of viticulture. Mancozeb’s role, while sometimes viewed through the lens of regulatory scrutiny, remains pivotal in maintaining both productivity and market viability. The insights shared during the webinar demonstrate that strategic, data-driven approaches to fungicide use can yield multifaceted benefits, reinforcing economic resilience for growers, sustaining export markets, and protecting public health and the environment. The dialogue also highlighted the importance of ongoing education, capacity building, and collaboration among all stakeholders, as sustainable crop protection requires continuous adaptation to evolving challenges and opportunities. In conclusion, the Mancozeb stewardship webinar successfully illuminated the complex, interconnected dimensions of modern grape cultivation. The expert panel provided a comprehensive analysis of agronomic strategies, regulatory frameworks, digital innovations, and stewardship initiatives, offering actionable insights for growers, industry participants, and policymakers. The integration of scientific rigor, economic modeling, and regulatory understanding demonstrated that sustainable crop protection is achievable when multi-disciplinary approaches are applied thoughtfully and collaboratively. By emphasizing responsible fungicide use, digital integration, and stakeholder engagement, the webinar charted a pragmatic path forward for safeguarding grape yields, ensuring market access, and contributing to global food security. The discussions reaffirmed that effective disease management is not merely a technical endeavor but a critical component of resilient agricultural systems capable of meeting both economic and nutritional demands in a rapidly changing world. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3372/chemical-crunch-biological-breakthrough-rethinking-fertiliser-strategy-in-volatile-world.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3372/chemical-crunch-biological-breakthrough-rethinking-fertiliser-strategy-in-volatile-world.html Wed, 05 Nov 2025 14:47:45 +0530 The 2025 fertiliser upheaval has laid bare the disquieting vulnerabilities of India’s nutrient security—an economy shackled to volatile global markets, skewed subsidies, and an unhealthy addiction to artificially cheap urea. What appears as a transient supply disturbance is, in reality, a geopolitical tremor triggered by China’s export restrictions, Russia’s selective opportunism, and the capriciousness of global energy prices, all converging to imperil the livelihoods of millions of smallholders. This article therefore discusses how emergency imports and ballooning subsidies merely anaesthetise a deeper malaise while the soil continues to suffer from decades of nutritional imbalance. It scrutinises the emerging promise of biofertilisers and microbial technologies—no naïve replacements, but synergistic enhancers capable of restoring soil vitality, improving nutrient-use efficiency, and relieving India’s fiscal burden. Ultimately, it calls for a paradigm shift toward a resilient hybrid nutrient strategy that embeds biological intelligence into mainstream agriculture, fortifying both food sovereignty and climate resilience. The global food system is once again under pressure from a fertilizer shock. In early 2025, prices surged sharply—Diammonium Phosphate (DAP) and Triple Superphosphate experiencing the steepest escalation, while nitrogen markets oscillated amid volatile energy costs. “Every fertilizer crunch is more than an input shock—it exposes the fragility of food systems intertwined with energy and mineral geopolitics. For India, with one of the world’s largest subsidy bills, surging global phosphate or nitrogen prices intensify fiscal strain and farmer vulnerability, while export curbs amplify these systemic risks “, stated Renuka Diwan, CEO, BioPrime. “Fertilizer crunches aren’t mere supply shocks—they expose how fragile food systems are when tied to global energy and mineral geopolitics. India’s fiscal and farmer vulnerabilities rise with every price surge. Crises like this urge systemic change: integrating biofertilisers, nutrient enhancers, and biostimulants can boost nutrient use efficiency, improve soil health, reduce subsidy burdens, and give farmers greater resilience and confidence.” - Renuka Diwan, CEO, BioPrime The crisis exposes systemic fragilities. “What we are witnessing is not merely a supply disruption but a systemic unravelling — where global export curbs, volatile energy costs, and our chronic import dependency have converged to expose the fragility of India’s fertiliser architecture. The perversity of artificially low urea prices has distorted nutrient balance, while bureaucratic inertia in logistics and subsidy flows has compounded the malaise. In truth, the crisis is less about scarcity and more about structural myopia,” added Jayanta Chakraborty, Chairman, Agriculture Committee, BCC&I. Ajay Kakra, Leader – Food and Agriculture, GIDAS, Forvis Mazars in India, further explains how fertiliser crunch directly straining farmers and household budgets. “Global fertiliser prices have surged, with the World Bank index up 15 per cent in 2025, while TSP and DAP jumped roughly 43 per cent and 23 per cent , respectively. In India, the landed import price of DAP approached Rs 54,160 per tonne, and urea averaged $546 per tonne internationally. Governments are underwriting enormous costs: India’s fertiliser subsidy outlays remain vast, with multi-thousand crore disbursements in recent years and targeted top-ups for phosphatic and potassic fertilisers of about $860 million in FY 2024–25 “, he analysed. “Bio-fertilizers are vital for resilient, efficient, and sustainable agriculture. They reduce dependence on volatile imports, enhance nutrient uptake, restore soil health, lower chemical use, and cut emissions. With India’s R&D, farmer networks, and supportive policies, rapid scale-up is possible. Immediate, medium, and long-term actions—from emergency imports to local production clusters—can embed bio-inputs at the heart of our nutrient strategy.”  - Jayanta Chakraborty, Chairman, Agriculture Committee, BCC&I Yet the crisis presents an inflection point. “ The fertiliser shortfall of 2025 isn’t just a supply glitch—it’s a wake-up call to the fragility of our food security, shackled to volatile energy markets, import dependencies, and subsidy distortions. Stopgap imports and capacity boosts may calm the panic, but they’re band-aids on a structural wound,” stated Sohit Satyawali, Chief Business Officer - Brand Business, Crystal Crop Protection Limited. “The real fix lies in rethinking our nutrient economy—treating biofertilisers and microbial inoculants as partners, not replacements, that boost efficiency, stabilise yields, and revive soil health. With fertiliser subsidies crossing Rs 2 lakh crore, even modest efficiency gains can unlock massive fiscal and farm-level payoffs. Field results already prove it: biological inputs are cutting chemical use by up to 15 per cent while keeping productivity intact—a rare win for both farmers and the exchequer ,”he opined. Chemical Crunch, Biological Boost The 2025 fertilizer crisis underscores that agricultural inputs are no longer mere commodities—they are instruments of geopolitical strategy. China, a leading producer of phosphatic fertilizers, imposed export restrictions in January 2025 to stabilise domestic prices, immediately affecting India, which imports nearly 90 per cent of its phosphate from China. Shipments were delayed, local stocks depleted, and costs surged, exemplifying “nutrient nationalism.” “Global fertiliser prices have surged, with the World Bank index up 15 per cent in 2025, while TSP and DAP jumped roughly 43 per cent and 23 per cent , respectively. In India, the landed import price of DAP approached Rs 54,160 per tonne, and urea averaged $546 per tonne internationally. Governments are underwriting enormous costs: India’s fertiliser subsidy outlays remain vast, with multi-thousand crore disbursements in recent years and targeted top-ups for phosphatic and potassic fertilisers of about $860 million in FY 2024–25  ’’  - Ajay Kakra, Leader – Food and Agriculture, GIDAS, Forvis Mazars in India Unlike the 2021–22 disruptions, this crisis coincided with climate-linked production shortfalls and high energy prices, intensifying risks for import-dependent economies. Meanwhile, Russia continued selective exports despite sanctions, exploiting regulatory gaps and exposing the fragility of a strategically vital yet concentrated market. The repercussions for Indian farmers during the Kharif season were acute. States including Odisha, Tamil Nadu, Haryana, and Andhra Pradesh reported severe delays in urea, DAP, and NPK blends, with rationed allocations, long queues, and localized shortages threatening yields. Harsh Vardhan Bhagchandka, President, IPL Biologicals , therefore streamlined the root cause of disruption in fertilizer supply chain : “The very foundation of nitrogen production—the energy-guzzling Haber-Bosch process—rests uneasily on natural gas, itself a hostage to the caprices of geopolitics and volatile energy markets. Meanwhile, phosphorus fertilisers such as DAP languish under export curbs from China, and the potash trade remains ensnared in the web of international sanctions. For a nation like India, which imports its entire potash requirement, this confluence of constraints not only imperils soil nutrition but also exacts a heavy toll on our foreign exchange and food sovereignty.” Adding on to the perspective, Vineet Jain, Managing Director , R M Phosphates & Chemicals Pvt Ltd further recommended “Relying exclusively on emergency imports and inflated subsidies is but a palliative, addressing symptoms while leaving the underlying malady untouched. The true panacea lies in weaving biofertilisers and microbial inoculants into the very fabric of India’s nutrient strategy—arming farmers against price shocks, alleviating the fiscal weight of subsidies, and restoring our soils’ enduring fertility.” "At Crystal, we foresaw this transition early and steadily built our GreenAg portfolio, which today includes trusted bio stimulants / nutrition brands like Talwar Zinc, Nutrozen, Marvel, and Calbrozen. These solutions have not only reduced farmers’ dependency on imported fertilizers but have also delivered superior ROI for small and marginal growers—a critical factor in sustaining their livelihoods. What truly differentiates the GreenAg portfolio is the way it is supported by our agronomists, known as ‘Crystal Doctors’, who actively engage with farmers to promote the importance of balanced crop nutrition and healthier soil ecosystems. “ – Sohit Satyawali, Chief Business Officer - Brand Business, Crystal Crop Protection Limited Dr. Suhas Budhe, Legal Advisor, SFIA, rightly terms 2025 fertilizer crisis as a perfect storm of interlinked vulnerabilities, thereby vividly illustrating how geopolitics, energy markets, and import dependence can converge to imperil both agrarian livelihoods and fiscal stability - “China’s reimposition of specialty fertilizer export restrictions from October 2025 disrupted global supply chains, hitting India hardest, given its 80–95 per cent dependence on Chinese imports. Volatile natural gas prices compounded the shock, as energy accounts for 60–80 per cent of nitrogen fertilizer production costs. Domestically, urea stocks plummeted 57 per cent, from 86.4 to 37.2 lakh tonnes, just as the critical Kharif season began. Global DAP prices surged 36 per cent , from $583 to nearly $800 per tonne, sparking queues, protests, and panic buying among smallholders. The crisis also strained government finances, with India’s fertilizer subsidy burden exceeding Rs 1.77 lakh crore.” The 2025 fertilizer disruptions illuminate a cascade of agrarian vulnerabilities. Crop yields hang in the balance when timely and adequate nutrient supply falters, while smallholders grapple with inflated prices and black-market distortions that exacerbate financial distress. “Integrating bio-fertilizers into cropping systems is essential for resilient, sustainable agriculture. These microbial inoculants enhance nutrient solubilization, improve plant uptake, and can supply 25–40 per cent of soil nutrient needs. Combined with precision farming, they strengthen soil structure, support a healthy rhizosphere, and provide a scientifically sound, environmentally friendly, and economically viable path toward decentralized, future-ready nutrient management.” – Harsh Vardhan Bhagchandka, President, IPL Biologicals  Rising fertilizer costs, coupled with expanding crop acreage, further escalated production expenses and fueled wholesale price inflation. Domestic output struggled—urea dropped from 102.1 lt to 93.6 lt, DAP remained steady at 13.7 lt, and NPK complexes edged up only modestly. Declining imports and depleting stocks intensified shortages, with partial relief achieved through substitutions like SSP and 20:20:0:13. Beyond immediate productivity, the crisis imperils food security and underscores the insidious erosion of soil health caused by over-reliance on chemical nitrogen, reminding us that short-term fixes often compromise the foundations of sustainable agriculture. Amid this disruption, biofertilisers such as Rhizobium, Azospirillum, Bacillus megaterium, and phosphate-solubilising bacteria can buffer farmers, reduce chemical dependency, and mitigate exposure to global price volatility. “India’s vulnerability to global supply shocks underscores the imperative of self-reliance in agriculture. “Fertilizer subsidies make inputs affordable for farmers but can inadvertently curb innovation in the industry. Fixed pricing and high chemical fertilizer support discourage investment in advanced formulations and slow adoption of organic and biological inputs. Globally, combining chemical fertilizers with microbes, biostimulants, and bioactive components enhances nutrient efficiency and soil health. Policy frameworks should incentivize sustainable, incremental innovation to create this synergy while reducing dependence on synthetic inputs.” – Shanmugam Sambanthan, Head-Agriculture, Middle East, South Asia and Africa, Novonesis By indigenising the production of chelated micronutrients, high-density NPKs, and crop-specific formulations, we reduce import dependence, stabilise prices for farmers, and conserve precious foreign exchange ,’’ opined Dr. Rahul Mirchandani, Chairman, Aries Agro Limited. “Our Make In India and import substitution initiatives have cut imported raw materials from 51 per cent in 2018‑19 to 18 per cent in 2024‑25. Localised manufacturing, R&D, and raw material sourcing are not mere operational choices—they are instruments of Atmanirbharta, shielding our agrarian economy from the vicissitudes of international markets,” he added. Toward a New Nutrient Paradigm Biosolutions are indeed making inroads among Indian farmers, yet their adoption remains embryonic. “Worth $ 100–127.5 million in India and growing 8–11 per cent annually, they can boost yields 10–40 per cent when used alongside chemical fertilisers “, opined Kakra. “ Yet adoption is limited—less than 5 per cent of farmers account for most usage. Scaling biologicals demands robust policy support: large field trials, quality certification, and strengthened extension services. Done right, they can curb import dependence, stretch subsidy funds, and restore long-term soil health,” he recommended. “Relying solely on emergency imports and higher subsidies is like treating symptoms without curing the disease. The real solution lies in integrating biofertilisers and microbial inoculants into the core of India’s nutrient strategy. These biological solutions can buffer farmers from future price shocks, lower the nation’s subsidy burden, and nurture soils for long-term fertility. ” – Vineet Jain, Managing Director , R M Phosphates & Chemicals Pvt Ltd  For India to realise the full promise of these biological inputs, a target of 50 per cent coverage across all cultivable land is imperative. Achieving such scale through standalone farmer adoption, however, would be protracted, particularly given the fragmented mosaic of India’s smallholder agriculture.  Infact, India is uniquely positioned to lead this transition. Existing initiatives—the National Mission on Natural Farming, PM-PRANAM, and the Soil Health Card program—provide institutional scaffolding for mainstreaming microbial inputs. “Biofertilisers are a potent alternative: a $2.5–2.8 billion global market growing 12–18 per cent annually. Brazil sees 15–30 per cent yield gains with 50 per cent less nitrogen; India reports 15–20 per cent gains with 30 per cent nitrogen reduction ”, advocated Dr. Buddhe . “They cost 30–50 per cent less than synthetics, improve soil health, sequester 0.5–1 t C/ha annually, cut emissions, and create sustainable nutrient cycles via nitrogen-fixing and phosphate-solubilising microbes,” he stated. “Biofertilizers are a compelling alternative, with the global market projected to grow 12–18 per cent annually. Brazil’s 80 per cent adoption boosts yields 15–30 per cent while cutting nitrogen use by half; Indian trials show 15–20 per cent gains with 30 per cent nitrogen reduction. Cost-effective, climate-positive, and soil-friendly, biofertilizers can transform nutrient cycles. Coordinated policy, farmer education, and public-private partnerships can build resilience and secure sustainable food systems.” – Dr. Suhas Budhe, Legal Advisor, Soluble Fertilizers Industry Association (SFIA) While examining the drivers of the crisis, its local manifestations in India Shanmugam Sambanthan, Head-Agriculture, Middle East, South Asia and Africa, Novonesis, quantified the opportunity to integrate biofertilisers into new- age medium- and long-term nutrient strategies. “The global fertilizer paradigm is evolving: biologicals—microbes, bioactives, biostimulants such as seaweed extracts and humic acids—are increasingly being woven into conventional formulations to enhance efficiency and rejuvenate soils. Biofertilisers are not adversaries of chemical fertilizers; they are synergistic allies, amplifying natural soil processes while chemicals deliver immediate nutrient support. Integrating these during production offers a bespoke, sustainable approach, gradually curbing synthetic dependence and tailoring nutrients to specific crops and agroclimatic conditions ,” he opined. “The challenge ahead is not just shielding Indian agriculture from external shocks, but integrating sustainable, Made-in-India solutions like high-density NPKs, crop-targeted fertilizers, and biostimulants into mainstream nutrient management. Combined with a strong domestic manufacturing base and scalable biological solutions, India can secure inputs, reduce subsidy burdens, and build the foundation for climate-positive agriculture. Aries Agro is proud to lead this journey.” - Dr. Rahul Mirchandani, Chairman, Aries Agro Limited Fertilizer manufacturers are therefore, evolving beyond standard NPK formulations, designing products tailored to the specific nutritional needs of high-value crops. Encouraging them to integrate biosolutions—such as microbes (biofertilisers), enzymes, and biostimulants like cell-free microbials, protein hydrolysates, and amino acids—into chemical fertilizers during production, supported through subsidies and capacity-building, can provide farmers with the combined benefits of biological and chemical inputs. The 2025 crisis underscores that fertilizers are no longer mere chemical commodities but instruments of biological intelligence. In the words of Renuka, “It is a call to embed resilience into the very fabric of agricultural systems. By combining chemical inputs with next-generation biologicals, India and the world can move toward nutrient security that is cost-efficient, climate-positive, and farmer-centered. We are not seeking replacement strategies but a total rebalancing—one that diversifies risk, safeguards productivity, and aligns agriculture with global sustainability goals.” ---------- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3368/from-feed-grain-to-functional-food-brazil-turns-sorghum-into-gut-boosting-health-drink.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3368/from-feed-grain-to-functional-food-brazil-turns-sorghum-into-gut-boosting-health-drink.html Mon, 03 Nov 2025 13:46:23 +0530 In an exclusive conversation with AgroSpectrum, Professor Hercia Stampini Duarte Martino and her research team at the Federal University of Viçosa (UFV) detailed their pioneering work on sorghum-based synbiotic beverages developed in collaboration with Embrapa and the University of Wisconsin–Madison. The innovation combines whole-grain sorghum with Lacticaseibacillus paracasei to deliver metabolic benefits linked to obesity reduction, improved lipid profiles, and enhanced gut microbiota balance. The researchers emphasized strong translational potential for Brazil, noting the product’s alignment with public-health priorities and suitability for vegan and lactose-intolerant consumers. They highlighted commercialization opportunities within the fast-growing global plant-based market, while underscoring the need for broader consumer education and regulatory validation. Looking ahead, the team is advancing larger clinical studies, new probiotic strains, and metagenomic analyses to scale functional sorghum innovation from lab to marketplace. Innovation & Rationale Your team developed extruded whole-grain sorghum beverages with and without Lacticaseibacillus paracasei. What motivated Embrapa to explore non-dairy, plant-based synbiotic products, and how do they address current public health challenges related to obesity and metabolic health in Brazil ? The motivation was to address two strategic demands: first, to expand food alternatives for vegan and lactose-intolerant consumers seeking functional plant-based options; and second, to develop solutions utilizing Brazilian-adapted crops like sorghum, with relevant nutritional potential. The whole-grain sorghum provides dietary fibers, resistant starch, and phenolic compounds that modulate gut microbiota and aid in glycemic control. By combining it with the probiotic Lacticaseibacillus paracasei, we created a synbiotic product with a combined effect on satiety, insulin sensitivity, and low-grade inflammation. This innovation is aligned with obesity management policies, offering an accessible, sustainable, and culturally appropriate dietary intervention for the Brazilian population. Nutritional & Functional Insights The study highlights high levels of resistant starch, phenolic compounds, and antioxidants in the BRS 305 sorghum beverage. How do these bioactive compounds mechanistically contribute to improvements in visceral fat, lipid profiles, and overall cardiovascular risk markers, such as Castelli index I ? These components act via complementary mechanisms. Resistant Starch reaches the colon, where it is fermented into Short-Chain Fatty Acids (SCFAs) like butyrate and propionate. These metabolites improve insulin sensitivity, stimulate satiety hormones, reduce inflammation, and decrease visceral fat accumulation. Phenolic compounds and antioxidants protect against oxidative stress and the oxidation of LDL-cholesterol, a key factor in atherogenesis. This combination of actions favors the reduction of total cholesterol and LDL-c and can contribute to increased HDL functionality, resulting in a better total cholesterol/HDL-cholesterol ratio (Castelli Index I), a direct indicator of lower cardiovascular risk. Probiotic Synergy Could you elaborate on the interplay between the probiotic and the sorghum matrix, particularly how sorghum nutrients enhance probiotic viability and short-chain fatty acid production? Sorghum provides dietary fibers, resistant starch, and micronutrients that function as prebiotic substrates for Lacticaseibacillus paracasei and the resident microbiota. This nutritional environment favors the viability of probiotic during storage and passage through the gastrointestinal tract. The fermentation of these fibers intensifies the production of SCFAs, which potentiate the beneficial intestinal and metabolic effects. The result is a true synbiotic relationship: the sorghum protects and feeds the probiotic, and the probiotic maximizes the beneficial conversion of fermentable compounds naturally presents in the grain matrix. Clinical & Public Health Implications Given that this was a pilot study with 30 overweight and obese adults, how do you envision scaling these findings to broader populations? What role could sorghum-based synbiotic beverages play in national dietary guidelines or obesity prevention programs? The pilot study demonstrated safety and positive outcomes in overweight and obese individuals, although the sample size was limited. We are currently analyzing data from a subsequent study conducted with a larger number of individuals with overweight and obesity in order to validate the pilot findings. The next steps will likely involve larger, multicenter clinical trials that include more diverse population groups and long-term follow-up with robust clinical and metabolic endpoints. If the benefits are confirmed, sorghum-based synbiotic beverages could be incorporated into national healthy eating guidelines and implemented in schools, primary healthcare settings within the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS), and obesity prevention initiatives, given that this technology is accessible, affordable, and readily scalable throughout Brazil. Market & Consumer Adoption Plant-based, non-dairy probiotics are gaining traction globally. From Embrapa’s perspective, what are the key opportunities and challenges for commercializing these sorghum beverages in Brazil and internationally, especially for vegan and lactose-intolerant populations? Opportunities are clear: the continuous growth of the plant-based market, driven by vegans, lactose-intolerant individuals, and health-conscious consumers. Sorghum adds nutritional value and sustainability. Challenges include ensuring sensory acceptance (taste/texture), achieving probiotic stability in non-dairy matrices, navigating functional claim regulations, and needing educational campaigns, as sorghum is still unfamiliar to many Brazilian consumers. Robust scientific proof and sustainability certifications can facilitate access to the international functional food market. Future Research & Technological Horizons Looking ahead, what are the next steps for Embrapa in optimizing sorghum-based functional foods? Are there plans to explore longer-term interventions, other probiotic strains, or potential impacts on gut microbiota diversity and metabolic health outcomes? Research will advance on several fronts: longer and multi-center clinical studies to assess sustained effects on weight control, lipids, and insulin. We will also explore new probiotic strains and technologies like microencapsulation to maximize bioactive compounds and probiotic viability. The metagenomic and metabolomic analyses will deepen the understanding of how the beverage modulates the gut microbiota diversity and function, including the role of the mycobiota, and its direct relation to the observed metabolic effects. Sustainability & Crop Valorization Sorghum is underutilized in Brazil for human consumption. How does this research contribute to crop valorization, climate-resilient agriculture, and the development of functional foods that are both nutritionally and environmentally sustainable? By developing a high-value product for human consumption, we are valorizing sorghum and creating a new market beyond animal feed, which is crucial for national food security. Sorghum is a drought-resistant and water-efficient crop, strengthening agricultural systems resilient to climate change. The use of whole-grain maximizes the uptake of dietary fibers and micronutrients while reducing the environmental footprint compared to animal-based inputs. This approach aligns with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): SDG 2 – Zero Hunger, SDG 3 – Good Health and Well-being, SDG 8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth, SDG 12 – Responsible Consumption and Production, SDG 13 – Climate Action and SDG 15 – Life on Land; linking environmental sustainability, public health, and economic development. Translational Potential Beyond clinical markers, do you see potential for these beverages in sports nutrition, elderly care, or other specialized dietary applications? How might Embrapa collaborate with the private sector to accelerate innovation in plant-based functional foods? The product has potential in sports nutrition, offering gradual-release energy and recovery support via SCFAs, as well as in elderly care, aiding intestinal health and reducing chronic inflammation. It is also applicable in specific clinical diets requiring prebiotics and probiotics. To accelerate innovation in plant-based functional foods, Embrapa seeks private sector partnerships for technology licensing, industrial scale-up, functional certification, and sensory acceptance studies. Collaboration through Research and Development (R&D) consortia and technology transfer agreements is essential to ensure that scientific advances are effectively translated into accessible, commercially viable consumer products. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3361/coral-reefs-vs-climate-chaos-dr-jenni-brandon-on-race-to-save-earths-underwater-cities.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3361/coral-reefs-vs-climate-chaos-dr-jenni-brandon-on-race-to-save-earths-underwater-cities.html Fri, 31 Oct 2025 13:30:22 +0530 In an exclusive interview with AgroSpectrum, Dr. Jenni Brandon, CEO and Sustainability Consultant at Wild Beacon Consulting, reveals how coral reefs marshal an arsenal of biological ingenuity — from genetically diverse lineages to symbiont-swapping survival strategies — to endure the escalating tyranny of warming and acidifying oceans. She argues that restoration must be rooted not in cosmetic transplantation but in evolutionary prudence, selecting morphologies and genotypes most equipped for tomorrow’s oceans and leveraging naturally resilient habitats such as upwelling zones. Dr. Brandon spotlights the reefs’ macroeconomic indispensability: they are coastal sentinels, food-system pillars, and tourism engines whose erosion could destabilize livelihoods and national balance sheets alike. Although reefs are not classical blue-carbon sinks, she underscores their essential role in safeguarding carbon-rich ecosystems — a rationale for scaling blue bonds and debt-for-nature swaps that yoke biodiversity protection to investible climate outcomes. With the advent of AI-assisted surveillance, satellite foresight and rapid eDNA diagnostics, she concludes, humanity now possesses the tools to pre-empt catastrophe — so long as governance frameworks unite scientific precision, local stewardship, and uncompromising urgency. I. Reef Resilience and Climate Dynamics Mechanisms of Resilience: With rising sea surface temperatures and ocean acidification, what are the most decisive biological and ecological mechanisms that enable certain coral species or reef systems to withstand climate stress, and how can this inform targeted conservation strategies? More resilient corals have a few ecological commonalities, including living in deeper, colder waters, but also living in more variable waters, where they have become more resilient to changing temperatures than those in stable environments. Biologically, certain genetic strains seem to be more resilient, as well as the corals with more diverse genetic makeup. If you have higher genetic diversity, you are more likely to have some strains survive a bleaching event. Certain morphologies also seem to survive better, like in Papua New Guinea, where big boulder-shaped corals have taken over reefs compared to more fragile branching corals that are more sensitive to ocean acidification. Then there are also the coral-algae symbionts, where corals with more heat-resistant symbiotic algae survive better, and some corals will actually swap out their symbiotic algae for more heat-resistant algae in a warming event. Adaptive Management under Uncertainty: Given the high variability of reef responses across regions, how should policymakers and investors design adaptive, evidence-based interventions that balance short-term protection with long-term ecosystem integrity? Some intervention approaches include replanting coral outcroppings, and this should be done thinking about the morphology, symbiotic algae community, and genetic diversity of those corals. Too many of the same corals replanted will not add to the genetic diversity and could all be wiped out in a marine heat wave. Similarly, replanting corals in areas of upwelling may lead to those corals becoming more resilient and lead to more long-term resiliency. II. Economics, Valuation, and Climate Finance Monetizing Reef Resilience: Coral ecosystems provide critical services—fisheries, tourism, and coastal protection. How can we rigorously quantify these benefits in economic terms to attract private investment and integrate reef conservation into ESG portfolios? I'm not an economist, so I can't definitively answer that. But you have to think of the jobs created not just by the fishing vessels themselves, but the seafood processing plants, and the seafood markets and seafood restaurants. The tourism jobs that would disappear if there was no healthy coral reef to visit (hotels, restaurants, SCUBA boats, beach shops, etc). Also, the coastal protections that a coral reef provides, including stopping storm surge, protecting during hurricanes, fighting erosion, being nursery habitat for those fisheries. It goes on and on. Florida values their coral reefs at a value of $8.5 billion, when you start to add all those pieces together. Blue Carbon and Market Mechanisms: What are the methodological and regulatory challenges of incorporating coral reefs into carbon markets or nature-based solutions financing, and how can these frameworks ensure both ecological fidelity and investor confidence? Coral reefs are not direct blue carbon sinks themselves, because the act of calcification releases CO2. But they help protect other blue carbon ecosystems like seagrass from erosion or storm surge, so they are part of the blue carbon ecosystem. But to be part of the carbon market, there would need to be significant research on the MRV, or measurement, reporting, and verification, of exactly where the carbon goes in a reef system and how permanently it is sequestered, if at all. That's not to say that coral reefs aren't a nature-based solution, for all the ecosystem services I mentioned above. They are, and financing coral reef and restoration for those ecosystem services makes a lot of sense for both ecological and economic reasons. III. Cross-Sector Governance and Strategic Collaboration Private-Public Synergy: How should corporations, philanthropic organizations, and governments strategically co-invest in reef resilience to generate measurable climate, biodiversity, and economic impact simultaneously? There are debt instruments like blue bonds that are being created where a government, development bank, or corporation, issues a bond that is specifically designed for projects that benefit the ocean and the blue economy. These can be used for things like coral reef restoration, or preventing water pollution from entering the ocean and polluting reefs, or establishing an MPA, or making a fishery more sustainable. These often include debt-for-nature swaps, where a country's foreign debt is reduced in exchange for investing in conservation projects. These bonds are new but have been incredibly successful both economically and for the climate. IV. Innovation and Forward-Looking Insights Technology-Enabled Monitoring and Intervention: Emerging tools—AI-driven reef health analytics, satellite imaging, and environmental DNA—offer unprecedented monitoring precision. How can these technologies be integrated into decision-making pipelines to optimize intervention timing, prioritize restoration, and de-risk investments in reef resilience? These tools are de-risking some of the decisions about where and when to focus restoration efforts. They are allowing scientists to be more precise in replanting efforts, but also to see a bleaching event coming earlier so they can react quicker. They are taking the guesswork out of some of this research and allowing scientists to not spend so many manhours underwater surveying the reef, but instead have eyes on what's going on nearly 24/7. By allowing scientists to see what's going on at all times, that allows them to make more informed, quicker, restoration and policy decisions. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3354/alexei-beltyukov-on-flexiforming-future-inside-unifuels-mission-to-scale-sustainable-aviation-fuel.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3354/alexei-beltyukov-on-flexiforming-future-inside-unifuels-mission-to-scale-sustainable-aviation-fuel.html Thu, 30 Oct 2025 17:29:49 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Alexei Beltyukov, CEO and Co-founder of Universal Fuel Technologies (Unifuel), elucidates how the company’s proprietary Flexiforming process transcends the constraints of conventional waste-oil-based biofuels, converting alcohols and low-value refinery byproducts into truly drop-in Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF). By delivering the elusive aromatic fraction required for jet engine performance — something HEFA and Fischer–Tropsch routes cannot independently supply — Unifuel simultaneously augments yield and slashes both energy and hydrogen inputs. Beltyukov underscores that Flexiforming’s modularity and compatibility with existing refineries and ethanol facilities offer a capital-efficient scale-up pathway at a time when the SAF markets are beleaguered by feedstock scarcity and punishing production costs. Policy acceleration toward 100 per cent synthetic SAF approval, coupled with long-term airline offtake agreements, he argues, will unlock the confidence necessary for global deployment. Ultimately, Unifuel positions itself not as a solitary panacea but as a catalytic enabler of a commercially viable, climate-positive aviation future, where complementary pathways collaborate to maximise every molecule of renewable carbon. I. Technology & Production From Waste to Jet Fuel: Can you explain the core technology behind Unifuel’s conversion of waste oils and fats into SAF, and what differentiates it from conventional biofuel pathways? Unifuel doesn't directly convert waste oils and fats into SAF. Rather, our Flexiforming technology complements existing processes that do. We convert alcohols like ethanol and methanol into high-quality SAF, and we upgrade the low-value byproducts—naphtha and LPG—from Hydroprocessed Esthers and Fatty Acids (HEFA) and Fischer-Tropsch (FT) processes that use waste oils and fats. The key differentiator is our single-step, all-gas phase reaction using a proprietary catalyst. This design reduces energy consumption by 75 per cent and hydrogen requirements by 33 per cent compared to alternative ethanol-to-jet processes, positioning our technology at approximately half the cost. Additionally, we produce aromatic SAF components that HEFA and Fischer-Tropsch cannot, which are essential for jet engine performance and achieving true drop-in capability. Performance and Sustainability: How do Unifuel’s SAF products perform in terms of energy density, combustion efficiency, and lifecycle carbon intensity compared to fossil-based jet fuels? Flexiforming produces SAF that is chemically comparable to conventional jet fuel, containing the 8-25 per cent aromatics that today's aircraft engines require. Our SAF has undergone comprehensive testing at Washington State University's Bioproducts, Sciences, and Engineering Lab—the world-leading authority on SAF research—and has been accepted into the ASTM D4054 Clearinghouse for qualification. This acceptance demonstrates that our fuel meets strict quality and safety criteria and shows strong potential for completing the ASTM qualification process successfully. In terms of lifecycle carbon intensity, depending on the specific chemical pathway, our energy-efficient process has a carbon intensity 10-31 per cent that of the incoming feedstock—a significant reduction beyond the inherent benefits of using renewable feedstocks. II. Scaling Challenges Feedstock Constraints: Waste oils and fats are finite and geographically dispersed. What strategies is Unifuel pursuing to secure a consistent, scalable feedstock supply, and how do logistics impact production economics? Rather than competing for limited HEFA feedstocks, our strategy is to make the best of what’s available and diversify. For example, for HEFA—indeed, a feed-limited pathway to SAF—Flexiforming can convert their low-value byproduct, naphtha, into the aromatic component of SAF. Apart from making the product a potentially fully synthetic fungible jet fuel (subject to ASTM approvals), this produces 20 per cent more SAF from the same amount of feedstock. Flexiforming works with any alcohol or ether, renewable naphthas, and LPG. This versatility allows plant operators to adapt to feedstock availability and pricing fluctuations. For ethanol specifically, we see significant opportunity. The U.S. already produces billions of gallons of ethanol annually for gasoline blending. As electric vehicles replace gasoline-powered cars, this ethanol can be redirected to jet fuel production without impacting food production or requiring new agricultural investment. Flexiforming offers ethanol plant operators an economically viable ethanol-to-jet pathway, 50 per cent less expensive than existing ETJ options. Refinery and Conversion Economics: What are the key technical and economic bottlenecks in scaling SAF production from laboratory or pilot-scale to commercial refinery operations, and how is Unifuel addressing them ? The primary bottlenecks are cost (SAF currently costs 2 to 4 times more than conventional jet fuel) and feedstock limitations. Our single-reactor design dramatically reduces capital and operational costs. Flexiforming is also designed for scalable deployment at various sizes, from small bolt-on units for Fischer-Tropsch plants to large refinery-scale installations. This flexibility allows producers to match their investment to their specific circumstances rather than requiring massive upfront capital. Critically, we integrate with existing infrastructure, minimizing deployment costs and accelerating time to market. Our successful 2024 five-month pilot campaign demonstrates we've moved beyond laboratory concepts closer to commercially proven, reproducible technology. III. Policy & Market Dynamics Regulatory Alignment: How do government incentives, blending mandates, and carbon credit schemes influence SAF adoption, and where do you see regulatory gaps that need urgent attention to accelerate deployment ? Similar to how EVs initially depended on government incentives before becoming mainstream, SAF needs policy support to offset the current cost premium and give producers confidence to invest.The next step we are awaiting in the regulatory area is the adoption of a standard for 100 per cent drop-in, fully synthetic SAF. Currently, ASTM standards allow most SAF to be blended with conventional jet fuel up to 50 per cent . The industry anticipates approval for 100 per cent synthetic SAF by the end of 2026, but this requires addressing the aromatics requirement—something HEFA and Fischer-Tropsch alone cannot provide. Technologies that can produce aromatic SAF components should receive accelerated regulatory review and support, as they're essential for eliminating the need for continued blending with fossil fuels. Global Market Readiness: With airlines increasingly committing to SAF targets, what is your perspective on the readiness of global supply chains and airport infrastructure to handle large-scale SAF integration? Infrastructure is largely in place to support greater use of SAF, since it is a “drop-in” replacement that works with today’s aircraft. Once the fully synthetic SAF standard is adopted, common-carrier pipelines and all other infrastructure will be accessible to SAF. The real challenge is scaling production to meet growing demand. SAF currently represents less than 1 per cent of global jet fuel consumption, and closing that gap will depend on both technologies that make existing production pathways more efficient and cost-effective, as well as the regulatory approach. A lot of capacity and feedstock that can be used to make SAF are presently targeting renewable diesel. This is a partial result of how the tax incentives are set up, and also of the fact that when making SAF, the producers inevitably make significant quantities of naphtha - a byproduct that, in the absence of Flexiforming, has a relatively low value. Flexiforming helps in exactly that way. By upgrading low-value byproducts such as naphtha and LPG into additional SAF, our technology enables producers to generate more fuel from the same feedstock. This increases total output while improving project economics, which in turn helps airlines and fuel suppliers meet their sustainability commitments more quickly and affordably. IV. Strategic Outlook Investment and Partnership Models: What role do strategic airline partnerships, venture capital, and private equity play in enabling SAF scale-up, and what frameworks have you found most effective for attracting long-term investment? Strategic partnerships are critical, especially between technology providers, fuel producers, and airlines. Airlines’ long-term offtake agreements provide the demand certainty investors look for, while venture and private equity partners can fund early deployment. Unifuel’s model is based on technology licensing rather than direct fuel production, which makes scaling faster and more capital-efficient. Our customers can integrate Flexiforming into their existing plants with relatively low CapEx, creating a more distributed, resilient SAF supply network. This model appeals to investors because it allows them to participate across multiple facilities and feedstocks, reducing risk while accelerating market penetration. Beyond Waste Oils: As SAF demand grows, how is Unifuel preparing for feedstock diversification — for example, algae, municipal waste, or other renewable sources — and what technical or economic hurdles remain in that transition ? Feedstock diversification is at the heart of Flexiforming’s value proposition. We can already process any naphtha, alcohol or ether, so as new pathways to these feeds emerge—from algae, cellulosic sources, or other biomass—we can potentially integrate them. For municipal and agricultural waste, we complement Fischer-Tropsch processing. By upgrading FT's naphtha and LPG byproducts into aromatic SAF, we can increase plant revenue by 10-20 per cent, making waste-to-SAF projects more financially viable. The main challenge is not chemistry, but logistics and preprocessing costs. That’s why our technology can be deployed at different scales, even near the source of biomass or waste conversion. By enabling modular, regional SAF production, Flexiforming helps producers reduce transportation costs and make better use of local renewable resources. Vision for Net-Zero Aviation: Looking ahead 5–10 years, how do you see Unifuel contributing to a commercially viable, climate-positive aviation sector, and what are the key milestones the industry must hit to achieve that vision? We envision three major use cases: bolt-ons to Fischer-Tropsch and HEFA plants processing waste feedstocks; partnerships with ethanol plants transitioning from selling ethanol for gasoline blending to SAF; and retrofitting existing oil refineries for SAF production. The key industry milestones include ASTM approval for 100 per cent drop-in synthetic SAF by end of 2026; achieving economic parity or near-parity with conventional jet fuel through technology improvements and policy support; and successfully diversifying beyond limited HEFA feedstocks. Our goal is for Flexiforming to become a mainstream enabling technology—recognizing that no single pathway will meet 100 per cent of demand, but that complementary technologies working together can maximize resource utilization and make sustainable aviation the norm rather than the exception. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3353/reefs-as-climate-infrastructure-case-for-treating-coral-systems-like-coastal-assets.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3353/reefs-as-climate-infrastructure-case-for-treating-coral-systems-like-coastal-assets.html Mon, 27 Oct 2025 16:38:41 +0530 he traditional logic of reef conservation—protect the habitat, and the habitat will recover—is breaking down under the realities of a warming ocean. MPAs still matter, but they are being outpaced by global environmental change that local policies cannot contain. The future of coral reefs will depend on dynamic, data-driven management, active restoration, and financial mechanisms that treat reef health as essential climate-resilience infrastructure. In this new era, the question is not whether reefs can be protected—but how fast we can redesign the systems meant to save them. For decades, the global conservation community placed its faith in marine protected areas (MPAs) as the primary shield for coral reef ecosystems. The theory was simple: Designate zones where fishing is curtailed, run-off is controlled, and coastal development is managed—and healthy coral systems will recover, thrive, and resist shocks. However, the fundamental logic of that model is now under grave pressure. As marine heatwaves grow in frequency, intensity and duration, and ocean chemistry shifts with acidification, the assumption that protection from local threats alone can ensure reef survival has proven increasingly inadequate. “The speed of climate change is pushing coral reefs beyond the environmental boundaries they evolved to survive in. A reef functions much like an underwater city—dense, highly organized, and full of interdependent life. Corals rely on a narrow band of temperatures and water chemistry, and when waters warm, they expel their symbiotic algae, zooxanthellae, which provide most of their energy. Without that partnership, corals begin to starve, and pollution or disease can accelerate the decline. When corals die, the reef’s architecture breaks down, fish lose habitat, invertebrates lose food, and the ecosystem shifts into a simpler state with far less ecological function and economic value. Reef restoration is advancing, from coral nurseries to selective breeding and assisted evolution. Some coral–algae partnerships show natural heat tolerance, and herbivore-rich reefs in the South Pacific have demonstrated surprising capacity to rebound. But the communities that return are not the same, and we are only beginning to understand the implications for fisheries, tourism, and coastal protection.” --- Camille Gaynus, Chief Science Officer, BIMS (Black in Marine Science) Inside key reef systems—from the vast expanse of Australia’s Great Barrier Reef to the unique ecosystems of the Red Sea and the island-state reefs of the Seychelles—this truth is becoming ever more apparent. MPAs remain essential, but they are no longer sufficient. In this new era, reef resilience demands a fundamentally re-engineered approach: One that blends dynamic management, cutting-edge restoration, climate-smart zoning, real-time monitoring, and financial innovation. Equally, coral reef ecosystems must be woven into the climate-finance architecture—not simply as biodiversity assets, but as resilience infrastructure for coastal societies. This article examines three intertwined themes. First, the limitations of the traditional MPA model in a climate-changed ocean. Second, the emergence of what we might call “climate-smart MPAs” that attempt to address the new stress regime. Third, the critical gap in global finance: reefs are largely excluded from blue-carbon frameworks despite their enormous value, and that must change if scaled resilience is to be achieved. Why MPAs Are Failing in the Face of Global Stressors For much of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century, marine protected areas (MPAs) stood at the center of global coral reef conservation strategy. The theory behind them was straightforward: if reefs were shielded from local, human-driven pressures, their natural ecological resilience would give them the capacity to withstand shocks and regenerate over time. The traditional MPA model focused on what were understood as the primary drivers of degradation: unsustainable and destructive fishing practices, nutrient and sediment runoff from agriculture and coastal development, and physical damage from tourism or dredging. In many cases, this approach worked. Where MPAs were institutionally strong—backed by enforcement, ecological monitoring, and community participation—indicators such as fish biomass, herbivore abundance, and coral recruitment showed measurable improvement. These reefs, free from chronic local stress, were able to maintain healthier ecological structure and clearer competitive balances, particularly the crucial balance between corals and macro-algae. In this sense, MPAs succeeded in delivering what they were designed to do. " Coral reefs are one of the ecosystems that have been most devastated by climate range, with 14 per cent of the world's coral dying from 2009 to 2018. Climate change has multiple impacts on coral reefs, including sea level rise, that brings sedimentation, stronger and more frequent storms that destroy reefs, changing precipitation patterns that bring increased runoff, freshwater and land pollutants, often causing algal blooms or infectious diseases, and altered ocean currents that can affect coral larval dispersal. But the biggest effects of climate change on coral reefs are increased ocean acidification and ocean warming, which lead to coral bleaching events.  However corals are resilient. Although right now 80 per cent + of world corals are in a mass bleaching event because the ocean is so warm, that does not mean that all of those corals are going to die. It means those corals are incredibly stressed, and their zooxanthellae (the photosynthetic organisms that live inside corals and give them food) have left the corals, leaving them vulnerable to starvation and disease. But when the temperature goes down and the bleaching event is over, the zooxanthellae can return. The coral can survive. There are also pockets of coral that are surviving and adapting to these very hot temperatures, like in the Red Sea, where corals seem to be evolving to the hotter waters. And corals near cold upwelling waters from the deep seem to be surviving and then dispersing to farther reefs after heat wave events. Corals are in an incredibly vulnerable spot right now, but they are not doomed. " -- Jenni Brandon, PhD, Science and Sustainability Consultant, Wild Beacon Consulting Yet in the past decade, the conservation narrative has shifted dramatically. The stressors now driving coral reef decline are no longer predominantly local; they are global, atmospheric, and systemic. Marine heatwaves have emerged as the most immediate and widespread threat. As oceans warm, corals expel the symbiotic algae (zooxanthellae) that give them both color and metabolic energy. The result is bleaching—an outwardly visible symptom of profound physiological stress. Where heatwaves were once rare, today they are more frequent, more intense, and longer in duration, leaving insufficient time for reefs to recover between events. Ocean chemistry has also begun to turn against corals. As the ocean absorbs increasing amounts of atmospheric CO₂, its pH gradually drops. This process of acidification diminishes the availability of aragonite, a mineral corals need to build their calcium-carbonate skeletons. Even corals that survive bleaching events may struggle to rebuild structure, weakening reefs in the long term and reducing their capacity to provide habitat and shoreline protection. “Mauritius has experienced multiple mass bleaching events over the past three decades, each revealing both vulnerability and resilience within its reef systems. The first major bleaching in 1998, during an exceptionally strong El Niño, caused widespread stress but relatively low coral mortality compared to neighboring Seychelles and Maldives. Local cooling from cyclonic activity helped buffer the reefs, though shallow, poorly flushed lagoons were significantly affected. Subsequent surveys in 2005 showed coral cover below 5 per cent at many sites, with nutrient pollution, algal overgrowth, and crown-of-thorns starfish driving further decline. However, some locations like Bel Ombre retained high coral cover and species diversity, illustrating the importance of site-specific conditions and local management. During the global bleaching of 2016, Mauritius again saw widespread bleaching but limited mortality at monitored sites. Factors such as water circulation, herbivore populations, and depth played key roles in recovery potential. The most recent 2024 bleaching event underscores growing pressure, with regional data showing high rates of bleaching and mortality across the Western Indian Ocean. While comprehensive national assessments remain limited, these recurring events highlight the urgent need for sustained monitoring, improved wastewater management, reef restoration, and climate-adaptive marine protection strategies.” --- Anusha Devi Nawoor, PhD - Environmental Scientist, Tunley Environmental Case studies from around the world echo this conclusion. The Great Barrier Reef, widely considered the gold standard of marine protection and monitoring, has suffered multiple mass-bleaching events in the past decade and recently recorded its worst coral loss in nearly four decades. These outcomes occurred despite comprehensive zoning systems, restrictions on fishing, and sustained management investment. In the Red Sea, which has been viewed as a natural thermal refugia due to its unusually warm baseline conditions and the presence of heat-tolerant coral lineages, reefs are now beginning to show signs of climate-linked stress. The message here is not that the Red Sea is “safe,” but that even systems with higher inherent resistance face limits in a rapidly warming ocean. In the Seychelles, long held up as a model for island-state marine governance, reef systems remain deeply vulnerable to bleaching and acidification despite sustained conservation commitments and the establishment of extensive MPAs. These national efforts have strengthened governance, protected fisheries, and improved local ecological conditions—yet none of these interventions can halt the rise in sea temperature or shift the chemistry of the global ocean. Taken together, the pattern is undeniable. The MPA remains a critical conservation tool, but it is no longer sufficient as the foundation of reef survival strategy. It can control fishing pressure and pollution; it cannot control heat. It can restore ecological function; it cannot rewrite the physics of ocean-atmosphere carbon exchange. The challenge now is not to abandon MPAs, but to rethink what they are for, how they operate, and how they integrate into broader climate adaptation frameworks. The era of “protection alone” has ended. The era of “protection plus climate-resilience intervention” must begin. Emergence of Climate-Smart MPAs If the traditional model falters, what does the next generation of reef protection look like? Conservation practitioners, marine scientists and policy innovators are converging on a new paradigm we might call “climate-smart MPAs.” These have several defining features. First, they adopt dynamic zoning and adaptive management rather than fixed boundaries and static rules. In a warming, acidifying ocean, it makes sense to manage based on real-time risk: closing regions temporarily during heatwave projections, prioritizing coral refuges, relocating species to cooler or deeper waters when viable. In essence, the MPA becomes a living, adaptive system, not a static map overlay. Second, they integrate active resilience-reinforcement: restoration at scale, assisted evolution (breeding heat-tolerant coral strains), microbiome manipulation, artificial reef structures and shading technologies. In this model the MPA is not only a “do not touch” zone—it is a hub of intervention. Given the intensity of climate stress, passive protection alone is insufficient. Active adaptation is required. Restoration practitioners are now embedding interventions inside MPA frameworks to complement protection with adaptation. Third, monitoring and technology become central. Climate-smart MPAs invest in satellite–drone–autonomous vehicle systems, AI image-analysis, heat-anomaly forecasting and rapid response capacity. This allows managers to anticipate threat windows, execute intervention strategies, and adapt governance accordingly. Without such capability, MPA management risks being reactive rather than proactive. Fourth—and perhaps most critically—these next-gen MPAs are tied into financial and governance models aligned with climate-resilience outcomes. This means moving beyond donor-driven conservation budgets to resilience bonds, insurance-linked protection, private-sector risk sharing and credit flows tied to ecosystem services. In short, the reef becomes an asset class for coastal resilience. Some pioneering efforts hint at this shift. The Global Fund for Coral Reefs (under the World Bank/GEF umbrella) is exploring reef-plus financing models, integrating reef health with coastal-defense economics and tourism-risk mitigation. Island nations with tourism-dependent reefs (such as the Seychelles) are beginning to explore parametric insurance tied to reef condition. While these efforts are nascent, they mark the transition from protection-only to resilience-oriented financial design. One of the key challenges remains prioritising within MPAs those reef systems that have the greatest chance of persisting—so-called climate refugia. These are reefs naturally exposed to cooler upwelling, shading, or adaptive coral strains. Protecting these first may offer higher bang-for-buck than attempting to protect all reefs equally. This shift requires sophisticated data analytics, modelling, and risk-mapping. Policy: Where It’s Adapting—and Where It’s Stagnating On the policy front, there is both movement and inertia. A growing number of national adaptation plans, especially among small island developing states (SIDS), now recognise coral reef resilience as a critical adaptation pathway. International bodies, including the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI), now emphasise reef protection within climate adaptation agendas. Yet significant policy gaps endure. Many MPAs continue to be designed primarily for fishing-pressure reduction or pollution control—not thermal-stress mitigation or adaptive zoning. Institutional capacity in many reef nations remains weak, particularly for technical monitoring, dynamic governance or financial innovation. Perhaps most fundamentally, the global climate regime has no dedicated mechanism for reef protection—no reef-specific emissions target, no international reef insurance fund, no global carbon-market equivalency for reef resilience. In the absence of such mechanisms, MPAs remain dependent on national budgets or donor grants alone, limiting scale and innovation. Some countries show flashes of policy innovation. The Seychelles, for instance, has piloted marine-resilience bonds and sustainable tourism-linked reef protection. In Australia, the management of the Great Barrier Reef has begun to incorporate resilience-based interventions and climate-risk forecasting. Still, these remain exceptions, not yet the norm. A further policy bottleneck is the disconnect between conservation agencies and finance ministries. Reefs have long been viewed through a biodiversity lens rather than as climate-resilience infrastructure. This framing limits access to adaptation finance, risk‐finance instruments, and climate-resilience capital flows. Changing this framing is essential. The Coral-Carbon Paradox: Why Reefs Are Missing from Blue Carbon Finance—and How That Can Change In parallel to governance reform, there is a glaring gap in how coral reefs are treated within the climate-finance architecture. The concept of “blue carbon” has gained traction in recent years, describing the capacity of coastal and marine habitats to absorb and store CO₂—mangroves, seagrasses and tidal marshes being the primary beneficiaries. These ecosystems have measurable carbon stocks, standardised accounting methodologies, and thus meaningful access to carbon-finance instruments. By contrast, coral reefs are largely absent from blue-carbon markets—and yet the logic for including them is compelling. Reefs provide vast ecosystem services: they support fisheries, protect coastlines from storm surge and erosion, undergird tourism economies and harbour biodiversity. Their failure imposes heavy social, economic and adaptation costs on coastal communities. So why haven’t they entered the carbon-finance agenda in any meaningful way? The answer lies in several structural and technical impediments. First, reefs store comparatively little long-term organic carbon. Their skeletal calcium-carbonate structures do not translate easily into the carbon-sequestration units used in current carbon markets. As one ecosystem-finance review notes: “Limited evidence is hindering uptake and progress” of blue-carbon schemes for non-traditional habitats. Second, the vulnerability and high risk of reef decline make them unattractive as long-term assets for investors. Third, policy definitions of blue carbon rarely include reef habitats, so the institutional pathways for finance are largely closed. Yet the time is right for change. If we shift the metric from pure carbon-storage to resilience value, reefs merit serious inclusion. Reefs reduce wave energy, limit coastal erosion, support fisheries and tourism livelihoods—all of which have measurable economic value. The emerging field of parametric insurance for reefs—linking reef health to payouts after storm events—is one frontier. Another is biodiversity-credit systems coupling conservation outcomes with finance. For global institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, the opportunity is two-fold. First, they can catalyse reef-resilience finance by underwriting pilot instruments, setting standards, and integrating reef metrics into adaptation funding. Second, they can shift national budgeting paradigms—treating reef health as climate-adaptation infrastructure rather than discretionary conservation. Doing so unlocks funding, elevates reef protection in national priorities, and draws in risk-capital. Toward a Resilient Future for Coral Reefs Re-designing reef management and finance for the climate-era means doing several things concurrently. We must actively identify and protect climate-refugia reefs—those naturally more resistant to heat stress or acidification—and prioritise them for interventions. We must equip MPAs with the technical capacity, real-time monitoring and adaptive governance necessary to anticipate and respond to heatwaves, bleaching events and acidification pulses. We must expand restoration and assisted-evolution tools: transplanting resilient strains, manipulating symbionts, deploying artificial reef frameworks and experimenting with shading or cooling technologies. From a finance and policy perspective, the shift is equally urgent. Reefs must enter the adaptation finance agenda, not just the conservation agenda. Carbon-finance definitions must evolve to resilience-finance definitions, making reef health a measurable asset. Incentives need to shift: tourism operators, insurers, coastal developers and governments all benefit from healthy reefs—so they should help pay for them. Multilateral institutions must create frameworks for reef-linked resilience bonds, parametric reef insurance, biodiversity credits and adaptation trusts. Finally—and critically—none of this will succeed if global greenhouse-gas emissions continue to rise unchecked. The best-designed MPAs, the most sophisticated monitoring systems, the most resilient coral strains will still collapse under the weight of relentless warming. A recent mapping study warns that reef futures are “intrinsically tied to global emission trajectories.” Local action buys time—but it does not buy immunity. Conclusion Coral reefs were once assumed to be savable with well-designed marine parks, strong fisheries management and clean-water regulation. In a warming, acidifying ocean, that assumption is no longer sufficient. The model of “protect and leave alone” must give way to “protect, adapt and finance.” MPAs should evolve into climate-smart hubs of resilience. Reefs should be reframed not simply as biodiversity-treasures, but as critical infrastructure for coastal protection, food security and climate adaptation. Reef resilience must be embedded within the climate-finance system—bridging conservation budgets and adaptation capital, drawing private and public investment into the blue economy. The path ahead is formidable. But the choice is stark: evolve the model—or let thousands of reef systems crumble under the tide of climate change. For the millions who depend on them for food, income, and coastal protection, there is no other option. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3335/americas-next-frontier-unlocking-africas-3-4t-agribusiness-market.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3335/americas-next-frontier-unlocking-africas-3-4t-agribusiness-market.html Thu, 16 Oct 2025 15:31:04 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Brent Boydston, Founder, Ag Center Solutions outlined how U.S. agribusiness can seize Africa’s $3.4 trillion AfCFTA opportunity. Feed grains, soy, and DDGS are prime entry points, but success hinges on relationship-driven partnerships, not just transactions. He stressed the need for investments in smallholder modernization, mechanization, and digital agtech to boost productivity and resilience. Boydston also called for next-generation trade frameworks that combine IP protection, technology transfer, and carbon-credit access. Africa’s low-input, biodiversity-aligned farming models, he noted, offer critical lessons for sustainable growth. Strategic collaboration, he concluded, can transform Africa into a hub for high-value food production and U.S.–Africa agricultural synergy. I. Market Potential & Geopolitics Africa’s Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) represents a $3.4 trillion market. From your perspective, what segments of agribusiness—inputs, processing, logistics, retail—are most attractive for U.S. companies to enter first? From my perspective, feed grains such as corn, sorghum, DDGS from ethanol production, soybeans, and soybean meal represent the most attractive first entry points into African markets. Feed demand for the continent’s expanding poultry and livestock industries continues to rise, and population growth will only intensify the need for affordable protein. Market entry will not be without challenges, differing regulatory requirements across the continent will need to be navigated, but these can be addressed through engagement and partnership. The U.S. is late to Africa compared to China, Brazil, and increasingly India. What does America need to do differently to avoid being boxed out of Africa’s agricultural future ? U.S. businesses need to recognize and seize the opportunities emerging in Africa. Companies must understand that African nations and their people want to partner with American firms, but success requires relationship building rather than transactional thinking. Business in Africa is fundamentally relationship-based. U.S. firms must invest in learning the cultures of the countries where they operate, which is entirely achievable with the right guidance. They should also collaborate with established U.S. government entities active in Africa such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service (USDA FAS) and with cooperators like the U.S. Grains and Bioproducts Council and the United Soybean Export Council. Both have strong local networks across the continent and can play a key role in facilitating market entry and building lasting partnerships. II. Investment & Capital Flows African agriculture still receives less than 5 per cent of total FDI inflows. Where can U.S. venture capital and private equity make the most immediate impact—financing smallholder resilience, scaling agtech, or building midstream infrastructure? Smallholder resilience, agtech scale-up, and midstream infrastructure are all vital investment avenues, but one area often overlooked is agricultural education paired with modernization. Farming practices in many African regions lag for several reasons, limited access to capital, weak risk-management tools, insufficient training in modern methods, and regulatory systems that are sometimes influenced by outside pressures rather than science. Take genetically modified organisms (GMOs), for example. Since their adoption in the U.S. in the mid-1990s, GMO crops have helped drive a transition from heavy tillage to minimum- or no-till systems, conserving soil and reducing input use. Yet in several African nations, bans on GMO seed cultivation or import prevent farmers from accessing these technologies and the benefits they bring in pest resistance, yield improvement, and soil protection. Investment that supports education, modernization, and science-based regulation would have immediate and lasting impact. III. Supply Chains & Infrastructure Africa faces a paradox: it holds 60 per cent of the world’s uncultivated arable land but imports $75 billion in food annually. Where can U.S. companies intervene most effectively—fertiliser supply, mechanisation, grain storage, cold chain? U.S. companies can make an immediate difference by strengthening fertilizer supply chains, investing in farm mechanization services, and developing modern grain-storage and cold-chain infrastructure to reduce post-harvest losses. These interventions not only increase productivity but also improve food security and the profitability of local producers. With the U.S. pushing for “friend-shoring” and resilient supply chains, can Africa realistically become a hub for U.S. agri-commodity processing and re-export into global markets? Africa is uniquely positioned to become an exporter of food and processed agricultural products. Large-scale production for the EU already makes Europe one of Africa’s top export destinations, while trade ties with India and other Asian markets continue to deepen. With a growing egg and broiler industry, African nations have the opportunity to expand value-added food production while importing feed grains from the United States. When paired with education and technology transfer, currently uncultivated lands could be brought into sustainable production allowing Africa to export higher-value commodities to its key markets. IV. Technology & Innovation Digital platforms in Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa are redefining input distribution and farmer credit. Where can U.S. tech giants and agri-startups collaborate to leapfrog Africa into next-generation farming ecosystems? Technology and innovation go hand in hand, and Africa is poised to lead in digital agriculture. Internet access has expanded rapidly, a 115 per cent increase in Sub-Saharan Africa between 2016 and 2022, and this connectivity creates opportunities for improved efficiency and integration with global market. U.S. agri-tech startups should look to Africa not only as a market but as a collaborative partner for developing scalable digital solutions. Whether in AI-driven crop consulting, digital finance platforms, or precision-farming applications, the continent’s young, tech-savvy population offers fertile ground for next-generation agricultural innovation. V. Policy & Trade Architecture AGOA (African Growth and Opportunity Act) is set to expire in 2025. What kind of next-generation U.S.–Africa trade framework would best unlock agribusiness potential? While it remains uncertain whether the U.S. Congress or Administration will renew or replace AGOA, that uncertainty will likely drive some African nations to pursue bilateral trade agreements with the United States or to pivot toward other markets. Fortunately, a foundation already exists: the U.S. has a full free-trade agreement (FTA) with Morocco; a Trade & Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) with the East African Community (Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, South Sudan); and multiple other TIFAs and Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) across the continent. These frameworks provide blueprints for deeper engagement between African nations and the United States. They can also help offset the loss of AGOA by encouraging commercial linkages between countries that already have agreements with the U.S. and those that do not. Are tariff concessions and export incentives enough—or do we need more holistic agreements covering knowledge transfer, IP, and carbon credits for regenerative farming? More comprehensive agreements are needed beyond tariff concessions or export incentives. Global integration requires frameworks that protect intellectual property and facilitate technology exchange while ensuring fair access to emerging markets like carbon credits. For example, to receive carbon credits, farmers must conduct soil sampling and meet strict verification requirements, activities that generate valuable data. That data should remain the property of the farmers who create it, reflecting their knowledge and stewardship. At the same time, they need access to improved tools, such as corn seed varieties designed for maximum carbon sequestration. Protecting the intellectual property behind those seeds and precision-agriculture systems is vital. Formal trade agreements can safeguard both farmers’ rights and corporate innovation, maximizing benefits for all parties. VI. Sustainability & Climate Diplomacy What lessons can Africa teach the U.S. about low-input, biodiversity-aligned farming models—and how can that shape bilateral partnerships? Though the U.S. and African farm sectors differ in scale and technology, they share a common goal: producing food sustainably for a growing population. Increasingly, African nations are turning to the United States for guidance on boosting production while conserving natural resources. A good example is the U.S.-based consulting company Sustainable Agricultural Solutions for Africa, which has worked in Ghana, Rwanda, and Kenya to transfer U.S. know-how on sustainable practices. These collaborations demonstrate a strong mutual interest in sharing best practices and are critical to shaping future bilateral partnerships. They provide tangible proof that sustainability can be achieved through cooperation and knowledge exchange on both sides of the Atlantic. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3333/ai-in-agriculture-sustainable-path-to-climate-resilient-farming.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3333/ai-in-agriculture-sustainable-path-to-climate-resilient-farming.html Thu, 16 Oct 2025 10:47:50 +0530 In this thought-provoking piece, Guillermo Medina, Chief Digital Officer at Pantaleon Sugar Holdings and Lead at Stomata Labs, envisions a world where farms evolve from sustaining humanity to actively healing the planet. He explores how artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming agriculture—from integrating fragmented data to delivering prescriptive, real-time insights that boost efficiency and yields. The article highlights AI’s synergy with regenerative practices such as biochar application and microbial soil enrichment, revealing how data-driven strategies can enhance carbon sequestration and soil health. Medina argues that AI empowers farmers to make smarter, evidence-based decisions, turning uncertainty into resilience amid climate volatility. Ultimately, he calls for a shift from extraction to regeneration, where technology and nature co-create a sustainable, abundant agricultural future. Imagine a world where farms not only sustain billions but also heal the planet. As climate change increases—bringing weather volatility, droughts, and floods—agriculture faces important challenges. Yet, amid these challenges lies a powerful ally: artificial intelligence (AI). Far from a futuristic gimmick, AI is already transforming farming into a resilient, sustainable force. But how does it work? And why should those in the agri space embrace this digital shift? Let's explore the journey, sparking that inner curiosity to rethink traditional practices. AI's role in agriculture isn't a sudden leap; it's a natural evolution. It starts with unifying scattered data—from satellite & sensors to weather reports—into coherent insights. Descriptive statistics follow, describing a picture of what's happening on the ground. Then comes the "why"—analytics uncovering patterns in crop growth or yield dips. Prediction takes it further, forecasting outcomes like weed & pest outbreaks. Ultimately, AI reaches prescriptive levels, advising "what to do" for optimal results. This progression mirrors how humans learn: observe, understand, predict, act. In practice, AI-driven precision agriculture uses tools like GPS and automation to boost efficiency, reducing waste and enhancing productivity. Studies show AI can increase crop yields by up to 25 per cent by optimizing inputs like water and fertilizers. The market reflects this momentum, projected to grow from $1.7 billion in 2023 to $4.7 billion by 2028. Isn't it intriguing how data, once unified, becomes a roadmap to smarter farming? At the center of this transformation is agriculture's symbiotic dance with nature. Plants, through photosynthesis, capture atmospheric carbon dioxide, converting it into biomass while releasing oxygen—essential for human life. This interdependence calls for wiser collaboration: prioritizing healthy soils teeming with fungi and bacteria. We've seen promising explorations with biochar—a charcoal-like substance from biomass pyrolysis—combined with bioengineering. Biochar enhances soil fertility, nutrient retention, and water-holding capacity, fostering microbial habitats that boost plant growth. As a bonus, it sequesters carbon long-term, reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Healthy soils can store two to three times more organic carbon than the atmosphere, with potential to sequester over a billion additional tons annually through sustainable practices. Regenerative farming, aided by these methods, could lock away up to 5 billion metric tons of CO2 equivalent per year until 2050. This naturally cuts reliance on petroleum-based fertilizers, as microbial activity recycles nutrients more efficiently. Ongoing data collection and AI verification at Stomata Labs are refining these combinations, turning trial-and-error into evidence-based strategies. Plants in vibrant soils grow faster, capturing more carbon while building biomass—essentially carbon rearranged into life-sustaining structures. Nature's elegance is evident here: higher growth rates mean greater carbon drawdown, with global croplands holding potential for 29 to 65 petagrams of additional soil carbon storage. But why stop at growth? This biomass opens doors to innovative transformations—biofuels for clean energy, green chemicals & supplies for eco-friendly industries. Picture turning crop residues into sustainable alternatives, harmonizing agribusiness with planetary health. The opportunities we envision are abundant. It's a shift from extraction to regeneration, where farming becomes a natural climate solution. AI amplifies this by driving operational excellence. It's about delivering the right data at the right time, empowering people to make informed choices. Digital assistants will guide attention where needed, saving time. Meanwhile, digital guardians monitor processes, questioning actions to optimize outcomes—from seed selection to harvest. AI recommends precise water and fertilizer amounts and timing, minimizing waste and ensuring robust crop development. This isn't a one-off fix; it's a journey, evolving with each season's lessons. In agronomy, where climate volatility wreaks havoc, AI assists in placing "educated bets." It analyzes data to guide replanting, weed and pest control, and fertilization—critical decisions that can make or break yields and companies. By adopting regenerative practices like nutrient management, AI helps mitigate risks, turning uncertainty into opportunity. Success hinges on curiosity and discipline: building robust data models, then verifying them against real-world agricultural processes. Failure? It's part of the growth, teaching resilience and refinement. This mindset fosters innovation, blending technology with nature's wisdom. As we face a changing world, AI offers agriculture a path to resilience—not just surviving but thriving in harmony with the planet. It sparks awareness of our interdependence with soils and plants, inspiring a digital transformation that feels both urgent and achievable. What if your farm could capture more carbon, yield more, and innovate endlessly? The journey starts with curiosity—exploring tools, data, and partnerships that turn possibilities into reality. In this evolving landscape, the ag community has the power to lead, leaving a legacy of abundance for generations. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3332/skybound-sustainability-indias-race-to-become-saf-hub-of-global-south.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3332/skybound-sustainability-indias-race-to-become-saf-hub-of-global-south.html Wed, 15 Oct 2025 16:59:05 +0530 India is charting a bold course to become the Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) hub of the Global South, leveraging its vast biomass, ethanol infrastructure, and policy-driven mandates. With domestic blending targets, state-backed incentives, and pioneering projects like IOC’s Panipat facility, the country is converting waste streams—used cooking oil, agricultural residues, and municipal solid waste—into low-carbon jet fuel. By 2040, India could produce 8–10 million tonnes of SAF annually, slashing lifecycle emissions by up to 80 per cent, generating green jobs, and creating export opportunities across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Startups, EPC firms, and R&D hubs are strengthening industrial capability, while harmonized global standards ensure both domestic adoption and international credibility. In short, India is transforming a climate challenge into a strategic, economic, and environmental advantage, positioning itself as the engine of aviation decarbonization for emerging markets. Aviation is global yet carbon-bound. Planes still rely on liquid hydrocarbons; electrification is limited, hydrogen is years away, and Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) is the only immediate lever to cut emissions in a sector responsible for 2–3 per cent of global CO₂. “The trajectory of SAF is nothing short of extraordinary—expanding from a nascent 5 million gallons in 2021 to 24.5 million gallons in 2023, a CAGR exceeding 100 per cent. Yet this still accounts for less than 0.1 per cent of global jet fuel demand, underscoring both the scale of the challenge and the immensity of the opportunity ‘’, mentioned Dr. Nripanka Das, Author, Sustainability & Carbon Markets. “The Sustainable Aviation Fuel Grand Challenge, announced in 2021, has set audacious targets of 3 billion gallons by 2030 and 35 billion gallons by 2050, requiring unprecedented scaling of production capacity and technological deployment. Pathways such as Fischer–Tropsch, approved by ASTM in 2009, already demonstrate how woody biomass, municipal solid waste, and agricultural residues can be transformed into jet fuel virtually indistinguishable from conventional Jet A. In this lies the promise of scaling an industry that not only meets aviation’s exacting standards but also redefines waste as the feedstock of the skies ,” he opined. In 2024, SAF supplied under 1 per cent of demand, leaving the Global South exposed. Fast-growing airlines in India, ASEAN, and Africa face minimal local supply, giving India a strategic opening. “In 2025, real progress in SAF isn’t measured by headlines but by bankable projects—those reaching final investment decision, securing long-term offtakes with price floors or contracts for difference, and moving into genuine EPC mobilization. Success is also measured in carbon intensity as much as in gallons produced, with lowering lifecycle emissions now as critical as expanding capacity,” stated Dr Jennifer Holmgren, CEO, LanzaTech. “In Washington, the vaunted ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ has compressed SAF’s erstwhile premium of $1.75 per gallon to a modest $1.00 under 45Z, ostensibly levelling the fiscal playing field with ethanol, but in reality propelling capital to cheaper road-fuel pathways such as renewable diesel. India, by contrast, has wisely eschewed the per-gallon palliatives of subsidies in favour of mandated momentum: a 1 per cent SAF blend in international flights by 2027, 2 per cent in 2028 under CORSIA, and an aspirational trajectory toward 5 per cent thereafter. Augmented by state-level incentives—capital subsidies, land concessions, and tax reimbursements—New Delhi is not merely nudging an industry, it is summoning it inexorably forward, guaranteeing a market, and inscribing India’s aviation future in cleaner, greener, and more resilient hues,’’ she added. " The American model bets on the market rewarding low-carbon fuels without playing favorites; the Indian model assumes SAF won’t take off without a legal runway. The strategic takeaway is clear: in the U.S., the winners will treat thinner credits as a design constraint, focusing on relentless carbon intensity reduction, locking in ironclad offtakes, and securing feedstock certainty. In India, success will hinge on executing the mandate-to-manufacturing flywheel—leveraging guaranteed demand, building robust domestic supply chains, and maintaining strict capex discipline. In both markets, SAF will only scale at pace where policy certainty aligns with the discipline of bankable project finance " -------- Dr Jennifer Holmgren, CEO, LanzaTech India’s aviation sector, ferrying 240 million passengers in 2024 and poised to double by 2030, stands at a pivotal inflection point. Fuel demand is projected to soar from 16 million tonnes in 2030 to 31 million by 2040. Enter Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF): capable of slashing lifecycle emissions by up to 80 per cent, India could produce 8–10 million tonnes annually by 2040—surpassing domestic demand, catalyzing 1.4 million green jobs, and opening export avenues. Already, 88 airports operate on green energy, with Bengaluru, Delhi, Mumbai, and Hyderabad setting carbon-neutral benchmarks of global significance. IOC is spearheading commercial SAF production at Panipat, with ISCC CORSIA certification. An initial 35,000-tonne annual output, sourced from used cooking oil from hotels, restaurants, and food manufacturers like Haldiram’s, will satisfy India’s 1 per cent international blending mandate. Alcohol-to-jet pathways and export prospects, initially targeting European carriers, are also under exploration. With blending mandates proliferating across Indonesia, Mexico, Canada, Europe, and Africa, and with low-carbon ethanol prospects beckoning in the United States, Praj finds itself at the cusp of a transformative expansion—broadening its portfolio in CBG, SAF, and ETCA while simultaneously amplifying the international dimension of its enterprise. Aircraft readiness is assured: Airbus confirms all planes can operate on a 50 per cent SAF blend, and Indian carriers have successfully executed demonstration flights. India is positioning itself not merely as a consumer, but as the SAF fulcrum of the Global South—where policy, pilots, and production converge to chart a sustainable, high-flying future. India’s Feedstock Opportunity: A Diverse Ecosystem India’s edge in the sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) race lies in its abundant and diverse biomass, not subsidies. Unlike nations constrained by monocultures or geography, India can channel agricultural residues, industrial by-products, urban waste, and renewable energy into multiple SAF pathways—positioning itself as both a domestic and export hub. In words of Dr. Pramod Chaudhari, Chairman Praj Group, “India is uniquely positioned to become the hub for SAF in the Global South. Its strategic location in the Asia–Pacific, with strong air connectivity to Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia, makes it a natural node for SAF supply and distribution. The Ethanol Blending Programme, scaled from modest beginnings to 20 per cent, demonstrates India’s ability to mobilise feedstock, implement policy, and drive impact at scale—delivering foreign exchange savings and strengthening rural economies. The foundation is further strengthened by India’s unmatched feedstock diversity. Agricultural residues and sugarcane by-products offer abundant raw material streams for SAF production.” " Praj has established several Centers of Excellence in collaboration with leading research institutes, working across the entire biofuels value chain—right from feedstock and technology development to end-product and application development. At the heart of this ecosystem is Praj Matrix, our state-of-the-art R&D center, which serves as the innovation hub for developing and commercialising cutting-edge technologies for biofuels and SAF. This strong integration of research, policy, and industry not only accelerates breakthroughs but also reinforces India’s credentials as a frontrunner in the global SAF journey " --- Dr. Pramod Chaudhari, Chairman, Praj Group Agricultural residues are the cornerstone. India generates 230–250 million tonnes annually, including rice straw, maize stalks, and sugarcane bagasse, much of which is wasted or burned. Rice straw alone contributes 80–85 million tonnes of emissions in northern states. Redirecting even 15–20 per cent into SAF via gasification, Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, or cellulosic ethanol-to-jet could anchor a domestic industry while tackling severe winter air pollution. “SAF can be blended at different levels with limits between 10 per cent and 50 per cent, depending on the feedstock and how the fuel is produced. According to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), over 360,000 commercial flights have used SAF at 46 different airports largely concentrated in the United States and Europe. An estimated 1 billion dry tons of biomass can be collected sustainably each year in the United States, enough to produce 50–60 billion gallons of low-carbon biofuels, ” stated Dr. Marcus Griswold, Founder at Little Green Myths. “ Ethanol is another pillar. India’s fuel-blending programme has built over 5 billion litres of annual capacity, spanning 1G molasses and emerging 2G cellulosic plants. Existing infrastructure can pivot to alcohol-to-jet (ATJ) production, with Praj Industries piloting scalable ATJ technology alongside global partners. " Feedstock costs represent the largest component of biofuel production costs, typically accounting for 40-60 per cent of total production expenses depending on conversion pathway and feedstock type. Wood residues and sawmill by-products currently cost $40-80 per dry ton delivered to conversion facilities, while dedicated energy crops may cost $60-120 per dry ton depending on production systems and transportation distances. These feedstock costs translate to $0.80-2.40 per gallon of biofuel production cost, indicating the critical importance of feedstock procurement strategies and supply chain optimization for overall project economics" --- Dr. Nripanka Das, Author, Sustainability & Carbon Markets “Ethanol is no longer confined to being a road-fuel blend; it’s a low-cost, versatile building block for an extraordinary range of products, from sustainable aviation fuel via alcohol-to-jet (ATJ) technology to textiles, cleaning agents, and everyday household goods. With advances in carbon capture and utilization (CCU), we can now make ethanol from industrial emissions, municipal waste, and even biogenic CO₂, turning liabilities into valuable feedstock. The result is a molecule that sits at the crossroads of decarbonization and circular economy. This is ethanol’s reinvention story: from a single-purpose fuel additive to a platform chemical powering the next wave of sustainable manufacturing ,’’ mentioned Dr. Holmgren. Niche feedstocks and urban waste further broaden the portfolio. Used cooking oil (1.4–1.5 million tonnes/year) feeds HEFA pathways, while municipal solid waste (62 million tonnes/year, 30 per cent treated) can support gasification-FT SAF routes, aligning aviation decarbonisation with Swachh Bharat and Smart Cities initiatives. “Airlines are betting billions and billions on jet fuel made from yesterday’s French fries—but can cooking oil really power the future of aviation? SAF made from used cooking oil can cut emissions by up to 80 per cent compared to regular jet fuel, but right now they account for only about 1 per cent of the world’s jet fuel supply. It’s also important to remember that not all SAF is created equal—some are made from food crops that can raise other environmental concerns, while waste oils like used cooking oil are among the most effective and sustainable sources ,’’ advocated Justin Goldsberry; CEO and Founder of Goldsberry Management Group, LLC. " We are on the cusp of new scaling for sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) in both the United States and India. But unlike solar and wind energy, renewable fuels carry a significant premium vs conventional fuels. Covering SAF’s cost above conventional jet fuel is a key factor to grow the sector. There must be a way to cover both the infrastructure capital investments and the ongoing operational costs of producing SAF. In the recent past, the U.S. Department of Energy Loan Office oversaw a loan program that offered funding for SAF refineries at favorable rates. Today there are no government programs to provide low-cost debt. The U.S. still offers incentives to cover operations in the form of credits for agricultural products (the renewable fuel standard – RFS) and for producers combining the product with fossil-based fuel (the blenders tax credit, and 45Z clean fuel production credit). Individual states are also providing incentives for regional consumption such as California and Illinois. There is no U.S. SAF mandate" ---- Adam Klauber, Vice President Sustainability and Digital Supply Chain, World Energy Looking ahead, cheap green hydrogen and captured CO₂ enable a Power-to-Liquids future. India’s record-low solar tariffs ($0.025/kWh) and $2.4 billion Green Hydrogen Mission create early positioning for synthetic SAF, potentially a decade from commercial scale. In the words of Suzanne McKenzie, Sales Director, Lifecycle Oils, UK, “ The sustainability credentials of SAF depend heavily on what it is made from. Second-generation biofuels (derived from waste like UCO) offer substantial environmental advantages over first-generation biofuels made from virgin crops such as palm oil or rapeseed oil. First-generation biofuels are controversial from a sustainability perspective because they can compete with products that would end up in the food chain. This can drive up prices and expand agricultural land use. “ Suzanne further opined that considering the growing biofuel feedstock crops to be carbon-intensive, and is associated with deforestation, land conversion, biodiversity loss, and high water consumption. - repurposing a waste stream like UCO, could  completely sidestep the significant carbon emissions associated with agricultural production and land-use change. UCO-derived biofuels can slash lifecycle carbon footprints by an estimated 80 per cent  when benchmarked against conventional fuels, and 40 per cent when compared to first- generation biofuels. She further highlights the pressure to decarbonise aviation is translating directly into binding SAF mandates and targets worldwide, which is driving a substantial increase in demand for the fuel. “The UK mandate legally requires a 2 per cent blend of SAF in all jet fuel from 2025, rising to 10 per cent by 2030. Similarly, the EU's ReFuelEU Aviation regulation starts at a 2 per cent minimum blend in 2025 and increases to 6 per cent by 2030”, she opined. "Across the Asia-Pacific region, we're also seeing strong policy signals and emerging targets on SAF. Japan is exploring a 10 per cent SAF share by 2030 for departing flights, and Singapore is introducing a 1 per cent SAF target for 2026, which could rise to 3-5 per cent by 2030. South Korea and India are both considering a 1 per cent target for 2027. The trend is clear – countries worldwide see SAF as the best way to cut aviation emissions in the mid-term. Meeting this demand will require significant scaling of SAF production – and demand is already outstripping supply. Current forecasts predict that by 2030, global demand for SAF will be around 15 million Mt, and by 2035, this looks set to reach 40 million Mt. In 2024, global SAF production was around 1 million Mt, with current predictions suggesting global capacity will only grow to around 18 million Mt by 2035. " --- Suzanne McKenzie, Sales Director, Lifecycle Oils, UK “Venturing into Sustainable Aviation Fuel is not just about aligning India with the global targets under the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation; it is about leading from the front,’’ mentioned Vijay Nirani, Managing Director, TruAlt Bioenergy. “Unlike countries such as Singapore or the UAE, where access to agricultural land is limited, India’s natural strengths in terms of vast agricultural base, give us the chance to turn this challenge into a defining advantage for our industry as well as environment,’’ he added. Compared with peers—Brazil’s sugarcane focus, Southeast Asia’s palm reliance, Africa’s residue abundance but limited infrastructure—India uniquely combines biomass density, refining and engineering capability, and growing aviation demand. The task now is acceleration: Converting latent feedstock abundance into a globally competitive SAF industry, bridging the supply gap for the Global South. " At TruAlt Bioenergy, we plan to establish a facility producing 10 crore litres of SAF annually, positioning us among the world’s largest ethanol-to-SAF producers. With CORSIA’s mandatory offsetting for international flights from 2027 and India’s 1 per cent SAF blending target, we are committed to scaling production capacity. Our ambition is to help India meet regulatory milestones while advancing sustainable aviation fuel adoption on a global scale.” --- Vijay Nirani, Managing Director, TruAlt Bioenergy Policy Architecture and Industrial Capability: Laying the SAF Foundations India’s sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) strategy exemplifies a rare convergence of policy precision and pragmatic precedent. Beginning with a 1 per cent blend in 2027 for international flights, rising to 2 per cent in 2028, these targets echo ethanol’s early E5 trajectory, signaling credibility to investors. With state-owned oil marketing companies—IOC, BPCL, and HPCL—underwriting demand, the sector gains sovereign-grade certainty in a capital-intensive space, translating policy intent into actionable investment confidence. " The good news is: the demand is definitely there; however, the biggest challenge for SAF adoption is scaling—waste oils are limited, production costs remain high, and infrastructure isn’t yet built to handle wider adoption. Furthermore, governments and policy support worldwide is helping, with U.S. incentives, European reporting rules, and efforts in some countries in Asia to expand SAF production and adoption. Still, the gap between ambition and availability is a major challenge because there’s only so much used cooking oil that can go around, and much of it is already accounted for in other industries. " --- Justin Goldsberry, CEO and Founder of Goldsberry Management Group, LLC Global compatibility forms the second pillar. By harmonizing BIS standards with ASTM International, HEFA, ATJ, and Fischer–Tropsch pathways gain immediate export legitimacy, while carbon accounting aligned with ICAO’s CORSIA ensures acceptance in Europe and the U.S. Without Western-style subsidies, India relies on engineering-led efficiency and procurement certainty—a model attractive to airlines wary of politically tethered supply chains. Catalytic finance, through NABARD credit, green bonds, or viability gap funding, remains essential to bridge upfront capital gaps. Industrial capability provides the third lever. TruAlt Bioenergy’s planned 10-crore-litre SAF facility positions India among the world’s largest ethanol-to-jet producers. Praj’s Centers of Excellence and R&D hub, Praj Matrix, integrate innovation across the biofuels value chain. India’s EPC sector delivers biofuel plants at 20–30 per cent lower capex than Western peers, while startups like GPS Renewables provide blockchain-based feedstock traceability. Together, these levers—demand certainty, global compatibility, and industrial depth—position India as the SAF systems integrator for the Global South, bridging domestic aviation growth with regional decarbonisation leadership. Strategic Leveraging for India’s SAF Ascension India’s ambition to become the sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) hub for the Global South requires more than incremental moves. It demands flagship investments, diversified technologies, climate integration, and regional market creation. While blending mandates and pilot projects signal intent, the real inflection point lies in scaling multiple production pathways and leveraging India’s geopolitical position. "There must be a way to cover both the upfront infrastructure costs and the ongoing operational expenses of producing sustainable aviation fuel. Globally, countries like the U.S. rely on a mix of loan programs, tax credits, and state-level incentives, even without a federal SAF mandate ”, mentioned Adam Klauber, VP Sustainability and Digital Supply Chain, World Energy. “India is taking a similar approach, combining national SAF blending targets with regional incentives—land subsidies and fuel tax relief—to encourage investment. But mandates alone aren’t enough; without enforceable penalties for underperformance, the sector risks stagnation. To move SAF from promise to scale, India must marry financial scaffolding with policy teeth, ensuring both capital and operational viability for producers across the ecosystem," he added. "Producing enough Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) to power planes is no small feat. The biomass requirements are immense, and land-use concerns—like corn cultivation in the U.S.—cannot be ignored. Beyond CO₂, we must also account for the full spectrum of emissions when the fuel is burned. Derived from renewable or recycled sources such as oilseeds, algae, fats, and agricultural residues, SAF can cut carbon emissions by up to 70 per cent compared to conventional jet fuel. Blends range from 10 per cent to 50 per cent, and over 360,000 commercial flights have already operated on SAF across 46 airports, mostly in the U.S. and Europe." --- Dr. Marcus Griswold, Founder, Little Green Myths India could produce 8–10 million tonnes of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) annually by 2040, positioning the country to meet domestic demand and become a key exporter. The ICAO ACT-SAF feasibility study evaluates India’s capacity to produce drop-in SAF, examining feedstock availability, production pathways, infrastructure readiness, and policy frameworks, providing a roadmap suited to India’s socio-economic and environmental context. With over 750 million tonnes of biomass, including 230 million tonnes of surplus agricultural residues, India aims for phased blending of 1 per cent by 2027, 2 per cent by 2028, and 5 per cent by 2030. The initiative is expected to cut 20–25 million tonnes of emissions annually and create new agricultural value chains.  Northern India alone burns over 50 million tonnes of crop residues annually, releasing 150 million tonnes of CO₂; redirecting even part of this into SAF creates a dual win for climate and energy security. A domestic SAF credit market aligned with ICAO’s CORSIA, coupled with EPC exports and technology licensing to Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, enhances South–South impact. Startups like GPS Renewables strengthen sustainability traceability. With the National Green Hydrogen Mission targeting 5 million tonnes annually by 2030 and ultra-low solar tariffs (~$0.03/kWh), India could become competitive in e-SAF. Anchored by double-digit aviation growth and policy credibility, India is poised to emerge as the SAF hub of the Global South. ----- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3328/turning-tide-for-wildlife-gavin-bruce-on-science-stewardship-and-sustainable-conservation.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3328/turning-tide-for-wildlife-gavin-bruce-on-science-stewardship-and-sustainable-conservation.html Tue, 14 Oct 2025 15:52:50 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Gavin Bruce, Chief Executive of International Animal Rescue, (www.internationalanimalrescue.org ) reflects on over two decades of conservation, highlighting the shift from top-down approaches to community-led strategies that empower local people while benefiting biodiversity and climate. On coral reefs, he stresses the need for proactive resilience building, combining restoration, local stewardship, and global climate action to safeguard ecosystems. Gavin emphasizes that habitat protection, rather than just flagship species, ensures long-term wildlife sustainability, with community engagement reducing pressures on natural resources. Successful initiatives, such as mangrove restoration, demonstrate how conservation can boost livelihoods, support female empowerment, and protect ecosystems simultaneously. Looking ahead, Gavin remains cautiously optimistic, calling for immediate action and a nature-positive economy to secure the future of wildlife and coral reefs. Opening Gavin, after more than two decades in conservation and animal rescue, what do you see as the single greatest shift in how the world now approaches wildlife protection? The single greatest shift is the move from top-down conservation to community-led, grassroots strategies. Rather than imposing protection on local people, the focus is increasingly on empowering communities that live alongside wildlife and nature.  By recognising their rights, traditional knowledge, wellbeing, and economic needs as central to sustainable conservation. This shift reframes wildlife protection as a social, economic, and climate solution, not just an ecological one.   By investing in people, we are investing in nature, and delivering positive outcomes for people, biodiversity and climate. Coral Reef Conservation Coral reefs support nearly a quarter of all marine species yet face existential threats from bleaching, acidification, and El Niño. How should conservation priorities adapt to this escalating crisis? Conservation priorities will need to shift from reactive protection to proactive resilience building. We need to build on what is resilient, restore what’s damaged, and reform how we live with the ocean. Climate adaptation: protecting and restoring reefs most likely to survive warming and investing in research to evaluate whether it is possible to increase tolerance through assisted evolution and coral propagation, and whether this can be applied at scale. Integrating local stewardship: empowering coastal communities to manage fisheries, curb pollution, and build sustainable livelihoods that reduce pressure on reefs. Creating protected and connected refuges: establishing and connecting marine protected areas so reefs can recover and repopulate after stress events. Addressing root causes: coupling reef conservation with aggressive global climate action to cut emissions. Technologies like coral gardening and assisted evolution are gaining attention. Are these scalable solutions, or stopgaps until broader climate action takes hold? If the conditions are favourable, corals have the ability to regenerate quickly.  I recall doing some research on the Great Barrier Reef, annually photographing transects on a reef that had been affected by a crown of thorns starfish outbreak.  After just ten years, there was significant settlement of a diverse range of corals.  The water quality was good (clarity, acidity, temperature, pollutants), and the recovery was remarkable. Coral conservation strategies must concentrate on boosting ecosystem resilience by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other drivers of reef degradation. The approach needs to be proactive, such that suitable conditions for coral growth and settlement are embedded into policy and management.  Reactive measures tend to be small-scale and targeted at repairing degradation that has already occurred.  From the research conducted so far, coral restoration can make a small but expensive contribution to the conservation effort. Coastal communities depend heavily on reefs for fisheries and livelihoods. What models best balance ecosystem protection with economic survival? Coastal communities are dependent on both the marine environment and coastal areas for farming; all of this is at threat from the effects of climate change and the breakdown of the natural support systems.  We have seen a tangible impact from working alongside communities on strategies that deliver positive outcomes for people and nature.  The coastal zone often comprises mangroves, seagrass and reefs; each of these ecosystems provides an important function in supporting livelihoods, bolstering biodiversity and mitigating climate.  By implementing community-led mangrove restoration initiatives, we have seen the risk of saltwater intrusion into coastal farms reduce, which supports the economy of coastal villages and reduces the The mangrove ecosystem supports biodiversity and reduces greenhouse gas emissions, mitigating climate change. They provide important nurseries for fish, which can support sustainable fishing and livelihoods. By engaging communities and giving access to knowledge and education, conservation efforts can be achieved through strong collaboration. Sustainable fishing on coral reefs involves a combination of strategies, such as establishing protected areas, using selective fishing gear, and setting catch limits and size restrictions to protect fish populations and their habitats and limiting fishing during spawning seasons. Wildlife Conservation Strategies Conservation efforts often oscillate between protecting flagship species and entire ecosystems. Where should the focus be to deliver the greatest impact? It’s all about habitats!  If you can protect the habitat, then the flora and fauna can thrive. Of course, flagship species are a useful tool in conservation efforts.  We work with bears, tigers and orangutans, which are all high-profile icon species that represent the ecosystems in which they reside. When habitats are degraded, fragmented, encroached upon, destroyed (due to natural or anthropogenic causes), then the sustainability of viable populations is diminished. This then disrupts the balance of the ecosystem, which causes stress, and reduced resilience.  This then becomes a spiral of decline, which is hard to reverse. The most effective conservation strategies empower local communities. The outcome must be increased health, prosperity and wellbeing for the people, which can then reduce the pressure on nature and be a template for resilient ecosystems. Sustainable Wildlife Management Are there global models—whether in forests, grasslands, or marine zones—that stand out as replicable for other regions? Most pressure on wildlife is as a result of anthropomorphic effects. At the local level, this is often due to a lack of access to healthcare, education, knowledge, skills and finance. This leads to activities that put pressure on wildlife and habitats: logging, hunting, poaching, fires, wildlife trade and encroachment.  By engaging communities in initiatives that improve prosperity and wellbeing, the drivers for more exploitative activities are reduced.  This has a positive impact for both people and nature. It is crucial that this is not a top-down model. While there may be similarities, each situation is different; therefore, to create sustainable change, these programs must be community led and tailored to the specific need. These grass-roots initiatives can then be scaled across different landscapes to create lasting change. A great case study is our community mangrove restoration program.  In low lying coastal farming communities, as a result of climate change - rising sea level and increase frequency of storm surges - that is an increased risk of sea water flooding the farms.  Salt water intrusion has a devastating effect on the crops and forces the community into poverty. Historically, the protective mangrove buffer has been removed, which exposes farming villages to a higher risk.  If crops fail, people are forced to engage in other, often exploitative, activities to generate income; this creates a threat to ecosystem. By working with these communities to restore the mangrove buffer, there is a tangible positive impact. Mangroves will boost biodiversity, mitigate saltwater intrusion, absorb carbon and bolster livelihoods.  In parallel, other activities to support communities are made available, access to education and literacy, healthcare, training to use organic farming techniques to increase yields and income generation.  The mangrove restoration work is often taken on by the women in the community, which generates not only additional income but also female empowerment. These are not large-scale NGO activities; instead, this is a local support structure that empowers communities to help themselves and learn from one another, building resilience and creating lasting change. Closing Reflection Looking ahead 25 years, what gives you optimism that coral reefs and wildlife can survive the climate and biodiversity crises—and what must the world do differently, starting now? Economies have long been built on fossil fuels and consumerism, based on the logic that 'more is good' and that wealth is just about money; however, this is changing.  As we can see from the global geopolitical picture, we are not all on the same page but, it is happening.  Technology is moving fast, and citizens are more engaged. There is a growing expectation that governments and corporations take action, and individuals are starting to take responsibility by thinking more about their own footprint. It is not too late, but the time is now to protect the ecosystems that we have left, build resilience, and move quickly to a more sustainable, nature-positive economy. ----- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3325/african-land-arab-capital-indian-innovation-groupe-mrps-vision-to-redefine-global-agriculture.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3325/african-land-arab-capital-indian-innovation-groupe-mrps-vision-to-redefine-global-agriculture.html Tue, 14 Oct 2025 11:59:51 +0530 In an exclusive interaction, Sumit Govind Sharma, Groupe MRP's Global MD and the President of the Indo-African Chamber of Commerce and Industry outlines Groupe MRP’s transformative vision to establish an agriculture corridor across 78 countries spanning Africa and the Arab world. Anchored in the “LIFE – Longterm Integrated Farming Expertise” model, the initiative seeks to bridge Africa’s vast untapped arable potential with India’s agri-innovation strengths, creating integrated, self-sustaining agribusiness clusters. Each cluster will combine food security, value addition, and climate-smart practices—ranging from solar-powered irrigation and biogas generation to digital farm management tools and hydroponic fodder systems. With 50 per cent of output dedicated to local nutrition and the rest fueling export-oriented processing, the model aims to reduce post-harvest losses and empower smallholders, women, and youth through skill development. By 2030, Sharma envisions a trilateral ecosystem—African land, Arab capital, and Indian technology—driving inclusive growth, resilient supply chains, and food security across continents. Groupe MRP aims to create a transformative agriculture corridor across 78 countries. What is the strategic vision for agriculture, and how does it align with India’s strengths in agri-innovation and Africa/Arab market needs? Our strategic vision is anchored in both opportunity and responsibility. Africa represents a paradox: approximately 80–85 per cent of its arable land remains underdeveloped, yet the continent imports over $70 billion worth of processed food annually. Namibia, for instance, produces high-quality tomatoes, yet without local processing infrastructure, it continues to rely on imports, highlighting a persistent gap between raw production and value addition. Similarly, in East Africa, countries like Kenya and Uganda export raw fruits and vegetables while importing packaged goods—a structural inefficiency we aim to address. Groupe MRP seeks to bridge this gap by creating fully integrated agribusiness clusters.Its flagship initiative, “Longterm Integrated Farming Expertise (LIFE)” is founded on the belief that “Food is LIFE,” representing the core of sustainable development and human well-being. It embodies a holistic approach to agriculture that combines various farming components for sustainability and productivity. This promotes recycling of agricultural by-products and efficient resource utilization. It aims to provide regular income and year-round employment for farmers. ​The model enhances food and nutritional security while conserving natural resources. Within these clusters, 50 per cent of output is earmarked for local food security, ensuring immediate nutritional and economic impact, while the remainder supports commercial processing, investment sustainability, and export-ready value chains. To initiate this vision, the program will begin with the development of 100 hectares of land dedicated to implementing the LIFE model. This pilot phase will serve as a foundation for building scalable, self-sustaining agribusiness clusters that can be replicated across regions, fostering inclusive growth and long-term impact. Infrastructure development is central to this strategy. We are establishing processing units, solar farms, and biogas generation facilities sourced from local cattle populations to create energy- and resource-resilient clusters. Beyond physical assets, human capital is a priority. Farmers receive training in modern agronomy, gender-inclusive skill development programs are implemented, and housing and healthcare support is provided for laborers. Our “Blessings From The Earth” (BFTE) Kit is designed to advance nutritional security through homestead gardening and promote holistic farm management. The initiative encompasses seed distribution, kitchen gardens, mushroom cultivation, fruit and vegetable farming, and the development of neem-based fertilizers and bioinsecticides. By combining India’s technological and agri-innovation expertise with Africa’s vast arable potential, the program aims to build a self-sustaining and scalable agricultural ecosystem that strengthens local livelihoods, food resilience, and global value chains. Sustainability is at the forefront of global agriculture. How is the Division planning to introduce scalable, climate-smart, and resource-efficient practices in partner countries? Our approach is multi-dimensional and intentionally integrated, designed to embed sustainability at every stage of agricultural development. Each cluster is structured around circular resource utilization, where rainwater harvesting, rotational cropping, and small-scale fisheries complement crop cultivation to diversify income streams and strengthen resilience against climatic variability. The integration of biogas systems from livestock waste, solar-powered irrigation, and sustainable nutrient management further minimizes dependence on fossil fuels, lowers emissions, and enhances ecological balance. Every intervention is tailored to local agro-climatic conditions, ensuring replicability and scalability. Our goal is to create low-carbon, climate-resilient clusters that optimize water, energy, and soil resources. By embedding sustainability within productivity, we are demonstrating that environmentally conscious agriculture can be both commercially viable and socially transformative. From hydroponics to digital farm tools, India has a rich agri-tech ecosystem. How will Groupe MRP transfer and localize technology to maximize productivity and profitability across Arab geographies? The Arab region poses unique challenges: arid climates, scarce water resources, and extreme temperatures. Yet it offers significant opportunities in livestock and fodder production. While we are in the early exploration phase, we plan to introduce hydroponic fodder systems, IoT-enabled farm management tools, and precision irrigation models. The key is localization: technology must adapt to local soil, climate, and socio-economic conditions. India’s agri-tech solutions—from water-efficient irrigation systems to digital crop monitoring platforms—will be adapted to maximize yield and profitability while reducing resource intensity. This ensures technology adoption is practical, scalable, and financially rewarding for regional farmers, while supporting broader sustainability objectives. What strategies will the Division employ to strengthen supply chains, improve market access, and reduce post-harvest losses, particularly for smallholder farmers? Integration across the value chain is fundamental. Fifty percent of cluster output is designated for government food security programs, while the remainder feeds commercial processing. We are establishing high-value processing units for mango pulp, cold-pressed juices, tomato paste, and packaged vegetables, directly addressing post-harvest loss, which in sub-Saharan Africa is estimated at 30–40 per cent for perishable produce. Organic residues are repurposed into cattle feed or bioenergy, creating near-zero loss systems. Cluster-level, pre-cooling units, and GPS-tracked logistics maintain product quality, extend shelf life, and improve market access. These measures stabilize farmer incomes, enhance product compliance for local and export markets, and establish resilient, export-ready supply chains. How will the agriculture DiVision empower local communities, including women and youth, through training, capacity building, and knowledge transfer? Community empowerment is central to our mission. Farmers receive hands-on training in regenerative agriculture, precision farming, and post-harvest management. Gender-sensitive programs ensure women actively participate in all operational levels, while youth gain marketable skills in agri-tech, digital farm management, and renewable energy applications. By embedding knowledge transfer into daily operations, we create communities capable of sustaining high-productivity, climate-smart agriculture independently. Over time, these clusters become centers of skills development, inclusive growth, and social resilience. Will Groupe MRP pursue public–private partnerships, research collaborations, or joint ventures in these regions to accelerate agricultural innovation and adoption? Collaboration is essential for systemic impact. We are partnering with local governments, private landowners, and agri-tech enterprises to co-develop infrastructure, research programs, and financing solutions. Public–private partnerships enable risk sharing and accelerate the adoption of modern, sustainable practices. Research collaborations and joint ventures allow us to localize technology while leveraging India’s agri-innovation ecosystem. The aim is to create scalable, replicable models where knowledge, finance, and technology converge to maximize socio-economic and environmental benefits. Looking ahead, how do you see this trilateral agriculture initiative contributing to food security, rural livelihoods, and India’s strategic role in Africa and the Arab world by 2030? This initiative creates a strategic triad: African land, Arab capital, and Indian technology converge to form productive, resilient clusters. By 2030, fully operational processing units and integrated supply chains will transform local economies, turning surplus produce into high-value exports such as mango pulp, tomato paste, and packaged foods for both African and Indian markets. The model directly strengthens food security, stabilizes rural livelihoods, and reduces Africa’s dependence on imported processed food—currently exceeding $70 billion annually. Strategically, it positions India as a preferred partner, demonstrating technological leadership and the ability to catalyze sustainable, inclusive agribusiness ecosystems. Ultimately, this is about systemic change: climate-smart agriculture, empowered communities, resilient supply chains, and transcontinental trade linkages—all embedded within an economically viable and environmentally sustainable framework. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3318/1-5-billion-mind-brew-how-mushroom-coffee-is-rewriting-hot-drink-paradigm.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3318/1-5-billion-mind-brew-how-mushroom-coffee-is-rewriting-hot-drink-paradigm.html Fri, 10 Oct 2025 17:10:21 +0530 Mushroom coffee and tea are redefining global beverage habits by blending daily rituals with functional wellness benefits. Driven by adaptogenic mushrooms like Lion’s Mane, Reishi, and Cordyceps, these drinks promise focus, calm, and immune resilience without caffeine crashes. The global mushroom beverage market, valued at $4 billion in 2024, is projected to reach $7.4 billion by 2034, signaling strong consumer adoption. Experts from brands like Nuvedo, Maverick & Farmer, and Hi Shroomz™ see this as the “Fourth Wave of Coffee,” where science and sustainability converge. However, success will hinge on extract quality, clinical credibility, and consumer education to distinguish genuine formulations from superficial trends. The global morning ritual is quietly evolving. Gone are the days of coffee drinkers versus tea drinkers — now, functional hot beverages are staking their claim, with mushroom coffee and tea emerging as the rising stars. These drinks blend centuries of ethnobotanical wisdom with modern cravings for mental clarity, immune support, and a smoother, smarter caffeine experience. So why are mushrooms finding their way into functional beverages like coffee and tea? “Mushrooms are the ultimate functional cheat code. Where botanicals need a blend of herbs to deliver multiple effects, a single mushroom like Lion’s Mane can handle brain health, gut balance, and immunity in one go”, says Jashid Hameed, Founder, Nuvedo. “They’re easier to formulate with — no bitter adaptogen aftertaste to mask — and their bioactives hit harder because our bodies recognize them; after all, we share almost half our DNA with fungi. The fact that they grow on agri-waste with a fraction of the footprint of wild-harvested botanicals, and you have a category that’s scientifically potent, scalable, and ESG gold,” he mentioned rightly. “Mushroom coffee epitomizes coffee’s Fourth Wave: after mass-market instant, specialty chains, and artisanal origin brews, the next era emphasizes personalization, functionality, and sustainability. DXN pioneered this shift, and today’s brands scale it for wellness-conscious consumers, transforming the morning ritual into a daily health ritual.” —- Jashid Hameed, Founder, Nuvedo Mushroom coffee is leading the charge. Picture your daily cup — rich, aromatic, and comforting — but engineered for a steady, sustained energy boost without jitters or crashes. “Dismiss mushroom coffee as a wellness gimmick and you’d be wrong. The science is real “, mentioned Ashish D'abreo, Founder, Maverick & Farmer Coffee Roasters.” Lion’s Mane supports neurogenesis, memory, focus, and gut health. Reishi nicknamed the “mushroom of immortality”—is backed by research for immunity, stress modulation, and metabolic support. Together, these mushrooms elevate coffee into something closer to a therapeutic beverage than a caffeine hit. For consumers increasingly seeking daily rituals that double as health interventions, this is a breakthrough,” he advocated. This is not fluff. This is strategy meeting science in a cup. In words of Oli Genn-Bash, Founder at The Fungi Consultant; Former President, UKC Psychedelics Society,” "The rise in functional mushroom beverages such as teas and coffees has been a useful way for people to experience the benefits of these fungi. Rather than just taking them in a capsule form like other supplements, consumers have the opportunity to integrate different mushrooms into their lives just like a regular tea or coffee, but with extra benefits! The main thing to look out for is the quality of the mushroom which is being used in the tea or coffee, the type of extraction method used for the mushrooms, and ensuring that there's a decent dose per serving of tea or coffee." Market Scale: Niche Today, Poised for Expansion The functional beverage market is massive, generating hundreds of billions globally, yet the hot-drink segment — spanning mushroom teas and coffees, matcha, kombucha, and adaptogens — remains a constellation of high-growth niches. Mushroom beverages are leading this charge, propelled by wellness routines and rising demand for cognitive focus, stress modulation, and immune support. “Mushroom coffee is where the functional beverage category grows up,” Jashid argues. “It’s not just a lifestyle flex; it’s 700-plus peer-reviewed studies in a cup. Erinacines and Hericenones in Lion’s Mane promote cognitive health, Triterpenoids in Reishi help regulate stress, and Cordycepin in Cordyceps boosts energy and stamina. Unlike plant-based or fermented competitors, mushrooms deliver a suite of synergistic bioactives that go far beyond a single functional claim. Unlike matcha or kombucha, it fits into the world’s most ingrained habit — the morning coffee ritual — without asking consumers to change behavior.” The global mushroom drinks market is projected to grow from $4.0 billion in 2024 to $7.4 billion by 2034 at a 6.4 per cent CAGR, led by mushroom coffee (49 per cent share) and powdered formats (65 per cent). Hypermarkets and supermarkets account for most sales, while North America dominates with 47 per cent of the market (~$1.8 billion). Mushroom tea, though smaller, mirrors these growth dynamics across North America, Europe, and parts of Asia, driven by DTC subscriptions, premium grocery placement, and café integration. “Reishi for calm, Lion’s Mane for focus, Cordyceps for energy, and Turkey Tail for immunity — what once felt niche is becoming a daily ritual of renewal “, states Dr Anish Hiresha Verma, Founder & CEO, Hi Shroomz™.” Our vision is simple yet bold: to reach a million patients and families in five years, transforming recovery into resilience in a $30 billion functional foods industry ready for reinvention,” he added. “Mushroom coffee is more than a trend—its medicinal extracts are grounded in decades of research. Yet the category remains fragile. To become coffee’s Fourth Wave, delivering daily health benefits, brands must tackle awareness, affordability, and authenticity. The science is solid; now the industry must earn consumer trust.” — Ashish D'abreo, Founder, Maverick & Farmer Coffee Roasters Matcha has capitalized on ceremonial heritage, antioxidant science, and premiumization trends, reaching $3.67 billion in 2025, with forecasts of $6.22 billion by 2030 at a 6.56 per cent CAGR. Regionally, the Asia Pacific held 45 per cent of 2024 value, while North America posts the fastest growth at 7.74 per cent CAGR. Kombucha, a more mature functional segment, saw the Asia Pacific market at $2.6 billion in 2023, projected to hit $4.94 billion by 2030 at a 9.6 per cent CAGR, driven by probiotic efficacy and social-lifestyle positioning. In emerging markets, India’s mushroom drinks market grew to $121.2 million in 2024, expected to reach $214.3 million by 2030, signaling expanding wellness adoption. Mushroom drinks uniquely combine nootropic and adaptogenic effects, delivering a multi-functional profile unmatched by single-ingredient alternatives. Taken together, the hot functional-drink ecosystem could scale into the low tens of billions within a decade, but growth depends on habit formation, not novelty. While coffee is daily and tea ritualistic, mushroom beverages remain “curiosity purchases.” Scaling will require flavor optimization, functional formulation, packaging innovation, subscriptions, and café integration. Jashid hence, leaves no doubt about the verdict: “Kombucha is a lifestyle statement, Matcha is a premium splurge, but mushroom coffee is the first functional beverage that can actually go mainstream. It’s not a fad — it’s the category’s endgame.” Consumer Appeal, Product Logic, and B2B Distribution Dynamics Mushroom beverages occupy a unique position in the functional hot-drink ecosystem, delivering value to both consumers and B2B partners. Consumer appeal stems from their functional diversity: Lion’s Mane enhances cognitive clarity, focus, and memory; Reishi supports immune health, stress reduction, and restorative sleep; and Chaga provides antioxidant and long-term wellness benefits. This versatility enables multi-occasion consumption: mushroom coffees for a morning cognitive lift, midday blends for focus rituals, and evening teas for relaxation and recovery. “And yet, for all this promise, mushroom coffee remains an afterthought in the functional beverage aisle. Consumer awareness is abysmally low. Ask an average coffee drinker about Reishi or Lion’s Mane, and you’ll likely get a blank stare”, added D’abreo. “Compare this with kombucha or matcha, which have managed to become lifestyle statements, and the gap is obvious. Mushroom coffee, by contrast, is still the preserve of wellness enthusiasts and biohacking circles. The result is a category with great science but almost no mainstream cultural relevance, “ he remarked. “Functional mushroom beverages—teas and coffees—allow consumers to enjoy fungi benefits beyond capsules, integrating them into daily routines like any regular drink. Success depends on mushroom quality, extraction methods, and ensuring a sufficient dose per serving to deliver meaningful health effects.” —- Oli Genn-Bash, Founder at The Fungi Consultant ; Former President, UKC Psychedelics Society For B2B partners — cafés, wellness retailers, subscription platforms, and corporate wellness programs — these touchpoints create opportunities to integrate mushroom beverages across daily routines, generating repeat purchases and cross-selling potential rather than relegating products to niche moments. Formats reinforce this: powders and sachets enable flexible dosing, low shipping costs, and subscription-based revenue; RTDs cater to grab-and-go convenience, albeit with cold-chain considerations; and capsules or wellness shots emphasize clinical validation and precise dosing, appealing to specialty retailers and corporate programs. “ Mushroom Coffee is more than a beverage — it is a movement that combines the richness of premium Arabica coffee with the proven benefits of medicinal mushrooms like Lion’s Mane, Oyster, Turkey Tail, and Milky. Packed with antioxidants, vitamin D, polysaccharides, and minerals, it delivers sustained energy, mental clarity, and stress relief without the crash of conventional coffee “, mentioned Lalu Thomas, Founder, Chefbae Mushroom Products Pvt Ltd. “By partnering with Kollam Krishi Vigyan Kendra, we directly support over 100 mushroom farmers with assured demand, fair pricing, and technical guidance, turning every cup into a catalyst for rural prosperity, ” he added. Distribution channels closely reflect these formats. Mushroom coffee thrives in specialty grocery aisles, subscription DTC platforms, and e-commerce channels, while mushroom teas are often positioned in premium tea shops, wellness-focused retailers, and experimental café menus. For B2B partners, aligning the product format with the intended consumer occasion is critical: a morning mushroom latte must deliver a coffee-like sensory experience to ensure habitual substitution, while evening teas must evoke relaxation to justify secondary placement or cross-sell opportunities in wellness assortments. Matcha mirrors mushroom coffee in cognitive benefits, offering a “calm-alertness” effect through L-theanine and caffeine, with strong appeal in ceremonial, café, and at-home rituals. Kombucha, by contrast, targets social and lifestyle occasions, leveraging probiotic efficacy, effervescence, and grab-and-go convenience to attract younger, wellness-oriented consumers. In sum, mushroom beverages, matcha, and kombucha combine functional differentiation, sensory appeal, and format versatility, creating opportunities for B2B partners to embed these drinks into multiple daily consumption moments, converting curiosity into habitual use and driving sustainable growth. Pricing, Margins, and Retail Dynamics Mushroom beverages occupy a premium niche in the hot-drink market, with prices reflecting functional potency, novelty, and production complexity. Pricing is shaped by format, ingredient quality, production scale, and consumer perception. Powders and sachets are the margin winners: low shipping weight, long shelf life, and flexible dosing make them cost-efficient to produce. When paired with subscription-based DTC platforms, they stabilize cash flow, boost customer lifetime value, and give B2B partners predictable demand and co-branding opportunities. RTD mushroom coffees and teas target urban convenience but carry higher costs. Cold-chain logistics, short shelf life, and premium packaging compress margins, making retail partnerships and precise inventory management critical. Positioning RTDs as functional café alternatives or wellness grab-and-go beverages enables premium pricing, but scaling requires operational rigor. Café integration is both a revenue driver and brand builder. Mushroom lattes and teas can command higher per-serving prices by merging ritual with health benefit — but flavour fidelity is non-negotiable. A latte must deliver the sensory satisfaction of coffee first, or repeat sales falter. Finally, retail placement is strategy in action. Hybrid positioning — wellness-adjacent but coffee-compatible — maximizes discovery and habitual adoption, turning mushroom beverages from novelty into daily ritual. “Reishi for calm, Lion’s Mane for focus, Cordyceps for energy, and Turkey Tail for immunity — what once felt niche is becoming a daily ritual of renewal. Our vision is simple yet bold: to reach a million patients and families in five years, transforming recovery into resilience in a $30 billion functional foods industry ready for reinvention .” —- Dr Anish Hiresha Verma, Founder & CEO, Hi Shroomz™ Then there’s ingredient economics. “But here’s the twist. High-quality mushroom extracts—dual-extracted and standardized for bioactive content—don’t come cheap”, discussed D’abreo. “That translates into retail prices often double or triple those of regular coffee. For most consumers, mushroom coffee isn’t a daily ritual; it’s a luxury splurge. Unless brands can crack affordability without compromising efficacy, mushroom coffee risks being pigeonholed as yet another elitist wellness trend rather than a true global beverage movement ,’’ he stated. However, the sharpest warning shot comes from the trust front: “The biggest threat to mushroom coffee isn’t competition — it’s credibility,” warns D’abreo. “Too many blends are dusted with trace amounts of mushrooms just to make a label claim. That’s not innovation — that’s marketing theater. The winners will be the ones who go all-in on transparency: standardized extracts, third-party testing, and clear dosing. Fail that test, and mushroom coffee risks becoming the next overhyped superfood that burns bright and dies fast.” “Packed with antioxidants, vitamin D, polysaccharides, minerals, and proteins, Mushroom Coffee boosts overall well-being. Regular intake supports immunity, reduces stress, and enhances mental clarity, focus, and memory. Its low-caffeine formula delivers sustained energy without overstimulation, making it ideal for health-conscious consumers seeking balance, vitality, and mindful daily performance.” —- Lalu Thomas, Founder, Chefbae Mushroom Products Pvt Ltd In sum, mushroom beverages’ pricing architecture balances functional efficacy, production complexity, and consumer expectations. Successful brands optimize across powders for DTC, RTDs for convenience, and café offerings for experience, while employing strategic retail placement. For B2B partners, mastering these dynamics is critical: consistent, scalable delivery of premium, functional beverages underpins profitability and long-term category growth. Bottom Line Mushroom tea and coffee sit at a rare crossroads of ritual, wellness, and functional performance. They are more than beverages—they are daily tools for focus, immunity, and relaxation. The market opportunity is immense, but success is not guaranteed by novelty alone. Winning brands will treat efficacy as precision engineering, supply chains as strategic assets, and sustainability as a core competitive advantage. The real prize lies in habit formation: converting curious first-time sippers into loyal, repeat consumers. Those who master the balance of taste, functional benefit, and convenience will scale from niche experimentation to mainstream beverage culture. Brands that chase trends without scientific validation, operational rigor, or supply certainty risk joining the graveyard of boutique functional drinks that burned bright but disappeared just as fast. The mushroom beverage revolution isn’t coming — it’s already here. The real question is who will win the battle for consumer loyalty in this nascent $1.5 billion category that’s primed for exponential growth. In the words of Jashid, “Mushroom coffee is the Fourth Wave of coffee — not just a better brew, but a smarter one. If the First Wave was about access, the Second Wave about experience, and the Third Wave about craftsmanship, the Fourth Wave is about outcomes. Today’s consumers aren’t just chasing flavor; they want coffee that fuels clarity, strengthens their inner shield, and aligns with a conscious, future-forward lifestyle. DXN planted the seed years ago, but now customers are watching brands scale it into a global wellness movement — we’re not just selling coffee, we’re selling cognitive resilience in a cup.” ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3312/spotify-for-kitchens-daniel-baven-on-future-of-digital-food-hubs.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3312/spotify-for-kitchens-daniel-baven-on-future-of-digital-food-hubs.html Thu, 09 Oct 2025 12:08:23 +0530 In an exclusive AgroSpectrum and NUFFOODS Spectrum Asia interview, Daniel Baven, CEO and Co-founder of Noahs, unveils how his company is turning everyday convenience stores into digital food hubs — the new crossroads of food, tech, and community. With its plug-and-play platform, Noahs lets retailers “stream” culinary brands like Spotify streams music, giving chefs global reach and consumers fresh, data-driven dining experiences on demand. The results speak volumes — Q8 stations powered by Noahs saw food sales surge 374 per cent and basket sizes climb 228 per cent. Unlike ghost kitchens or delivery aggregators, Noahs taps into existing retail kitchens, transforming them into profitable, AI-ready food networks overnight. Baven predicts that by 2030, food will replace fuel as the heartbeat of convenience retail — Noahs will be the invisible engine powering that revolution. Section I: Vision & Market Disruption Reimagining C-Stores: What inspired you to launch Noahs, and why is now the inflection point for reinventing convenience retail? The spark for Noahs came from watching how every major content industry—music, film, travel—has gone through its streaming revolution. Food hasn’t. Yet we have millions of kitchens sitting in prime retail locations, underutilized and disconnected from the digital economy. We saw an opportunity to turn those kitchens into digital food hubs. The real inflection point is convergence: consumers expect convenience, platforms demand supply, and retailers need new revenue streams to replace declining categories like tobacco and fuel. Convenience stores are sitting on the infrastructure of the future—they just need the operating system. That’s what Noahs provides. Digital-First Food Revolution: With the C-store market set to surpass $1T by 2029, how do you see technology reshaping the future of food retail? We’re standing on the edge of a complete reset. In five years, most people won’t cook at home the way they do today. It will simply make more sense to tap into a network of nearby retailers streaming great food, made fresh, faster, and cheaper than a home kitchen could ever compete with. Convenience stores and supermarkets are sitting on the most valuable real estate of the future — the crossroads of local communities. When those spaces go digital, they’ll stop being “shops” and start becoming marketplace hubs for food, experiences, and daily life. Technology is the enabler, but the change is cultural. It’s about food creators having a new stage, communities having new choices, and retailers becoming the backbone of the next food economy. Noahs was built exactly for that — to power this transformation and give retailers the tools to move from analogue to intelligent, from transactional to experiential. What’s coming is bigger than food tech. It’s a reinvention of how food exists in society. Section II: The Noahs Model – Technology + Brand + Kitchen Plug-and-Play Platform: Your tech platform can digitize a store with just a Wi-Fi connection. What makes this solution scalable across global chains with different IT maturity levels? The secret is simplicity. Most retailers are trapped in heavy legacy systems that make every new integration a nightmare. We flipped that logic. Noahs runs as a layer on top of existing infrastructure, connecting to what’s already there instead of trying to replace it. That means a store can go live in hours — not months — with zero capex and no new labor. The system plugs into delivery aggregators, POS systems, kitchen screens, and loyalty tools. The moment it connects to Wi-Fi, the store becomes part of a digital network that can sell, operate, and analyze in real time. It’s built for diversity. Whether it’s a gas station in Denmark, a supermarket in Belgium, or a convenience store in the Philippines, the platform automatically adapts to local tech setups and market conditions. That’s why it scales — because it doesn’t force uniformity, it enables it. Noahs is not just a tool; it’s a translator between the analogue world and the digital food economy. It’s what the retailers has been looking for, but it didn’t exist until now. Spotify for Kitchens: You’ve called Noahs’ Brand Platform a “Spotify for Kitchens,” letting retailers stream proven brands and menus directly into their stores. How do you curate the catalogue, and what data drives menu updates? We’re building a world where food moves like music. In the same way streaming opened a global stage for artists, we believe culinary creators will soon reach audiences anywhere — not through physical expansion, but through digital distribution. A chef in Copenhagen could see their tacos sold in Dubai the same week. That’s the future we’re shaping with Noahs. Our brand platform is the foundation for that future. It lets retailers activate proven food concepts directly into their stores, adapting to local tastes and neighborhoods instead of being locked into a single global brand deal. That flexibility is what the industry has been missing — agility, creativity, and cultural relevance. This shift also enables a complete rework of the food supply chain — simplifying how ingredients, inventory, and production flow through the system. It creates a feedback loop between real-time demand and supply, throttling production, reducing waste, and preparing the industry to fully harness AI. We’re still early in this journey, but the vision is clear: menus that evolve like playlists, brands that scale without borders, and a supply chain that finally moves as intelligently as the data behind it. For culinary entrepreneurs, it’s a new way to monetize creativity. For retailers, it’s the chance to become curators of food culture — not just sellers of products. That’s what “Spotify for Kitchens” really means: a living, breathing ecosystem where food, data, and creativity stream together. Modular Smart Kitchens: Your kitchens range from 1 to 20 m². How do you ensure operational efficiency, quality control, and food safety across distributed sites? The next decade will blur the line between retail and hospitality. We believe the world’s biggest food operators won’t be restaurant chains — they’ll be retailers. To make that leap, retailers will recruit from the culinary world, bringing in chefs, kitchen managers, and operational talent who can run hospitality at scale. What used to be a store will evolve into a network of kitchens, each designed for efficiency, consistency, and speed — powered by technology, not tradition. Noahs is the platform that enables this transformation. We don’t operate the kitchens — we power them. Our system acts as the operating layer that keeps every recipe, process, and temperature consistent across hundreds of locations. Retailers become the operators; Noahs becomes their digital backbone. On the hardware side, we’ve developed a full suite of modular kitchens — from compact 1 m² single-brand setups to 20 m² multi-brand environments for service stations, food courts, and supermarket delis. These units are engineered for throughput, safety, and profitability, with built-in monitoring and data loops that ensure every kitchen runs to the same standard. We also anticipate a wave of cross-company innovation in this space — robotics, automated production, drone delivery, and robotaxis changing the future states of the hardware component. Restaurant kitchens, as we know them today, simply can’t compete with that model. A Noahs-powered multi-brand kitchen can serve multiple food concepts with a fraction of the space, labor, and cost — while maintaining higher quality and consistency. That’s the future we see unfolding. Section III: Business Impact & Results Q8 Case Study: The Q8 transformation saw food sales jump 374 per cent and basket size rise 228 per cent. Which parts of the Noahs model (tech, brands, kitchens) drove the biggest lift? Those numbers from Q8 aren’t isolated results — they’re a preview of what happens when retail locations evolve through Noahs’ three-layer model. Every site that connects our technology platform, brand platform, and modular kitchens can experience a similar transformation. The tech layer creates instant digital access and operational visibility. The brand layer adds proven food concepts that attract new customers and expand sales channels. And the kitchen layer converts that demand into consistent, scalable output with an engine fit for the purpose. In the quoted Q8 case, all three layers came together at once — which is why the impact was so dramatic. But in most rollouts, we see a natural progression: first digitalize existing shop catalogues, then layer in easy-to-operate brands suited to the current store format, and finally scale through modular smart-kitchens and more advanced brand concepts. Each layer amplifies the next. What Q8 showed is that this isn’t theory — it’s the future playbook for every retailer. Service stations, supermarkets, and convenience stores can all become high-performing food hubs simply by activating the system step by step. The model works anywhere, because it’s built for the way people live now — connected, on-demand, and expecting quality food wherever they are. ROI & Adoption Curve: How quickly can retailers expect payback when adopting Noahs, and how do you help de-risk the investment decision? The short answer: fast. Because Noahs requires no upfront investment in new labor or capex, most retailers see positive returns within the first few months of activation. The payback curve depends on the depth of adoption — tech alone delivers immediate efficiency and access to new revenue channels, while layering in brands and kitchens compounds the effect. But beyond ROI, what really de-risks adoption is our model itself. We don’t ask retailers to change who they are — we enhance what’s already there. Noahs plugs into existing infrastructure and workflows, building value on top of current systems instead of replacing them. We also start small. A single pilot location can validate the impact before scaling to dozens or hundreds. The data from those first sites creates a clear business case — not projections, but proof. Retailers everywhere are under pressure to reinvent fast, but the risk tolerance is low. Our approach makes innovation incremental, measurable, and cash-positive from day one. That’s why Noahs scales — it rewards courage without demanding blind faith. Section IV: Competitive Landscape & Future of Food-Tech Standing Out in a Crowded Space: How does Noahs differentiate from ghost kitchens, Q-commerce players, and aggregator-led solutions? Ghost kitchens and Q-commerce were great experiments — but they’re built on isolated infrastructure. Each new location means new costs, new staff, and new risk. Aggregators, on the other hand, built digital demand but not digital supply — they own the customers, not the kitchens. Noahs connects the dots. We’re not building more kitchens; we’re activating the millions that already exist inside retailers. Instead of competing with delivery platforms, we empower retailers to integrate directly with them — turning stores into digital food hubs that can sell across every channel instantly. Where ghost kitchens chase scale through real estate, Noahs achieves it through connectivity. Where Q-commerce promises speed, we deliver sustainability — a model that actually works economically for both retailers and creators. Most importantly, we’re not just solving delivery — we’re reinventing food infrastructure. We give retailers the OS, brands, and hardware they need to own their role in the digital food economy. The future of food won’t belong to aggregators or ghost kitchens — it’ll belong to the platforms that make everyone else scalable. That’s where Noahs sits. 2025 Trends: What’s next for food-tech—robotic kitchens, AI menu personalization, functional food boom? Which of these will most affect the C-store ecosystem? The short answer? Noahs. Beyond that, it’s too early to expect any real leapfrogs in robotics. The robotics we see today are impressive, but they’re trapped between eras — built for a world that’s already shifting beneath them. The real step change will come when humanoid robots, like the ones Tesla and Figure are developing, can integrate naturally into existing operations. That’s a 2030 story, not 2025. The real 2025 trend in food will be the convergence of retailers into food — moving away from being simple convenience hubs to becoming food operators in their own right. That shift will ignite the most dramatic transformation the industry has seen in decades. AI will play a major role, but not yet in the way most imagine. Everyone’s talking about AI, but its real power depends on something far more fundamental: digitization. That’s what Noahs is building — the digital foundation that makes the intelligent food economy possible. Section V: Scaling & Strategy Geographic Expansion: Which regions outside Denmark and Thailand are next on your radar—and what makes a market “Noahs-ready”? Officially, we’re now expanding in 4 countries - Denmark, Belgium, Luxembourg, and Ireland. Within 2026, we expect to announce at least ten more countries across three continents joining the Noahs platform. We are currently preparing the best we can to meet the increasing demand for our solution. A market becomes “Noahs-ready” when retailers recognize that the old model no longer works — when rising costs, labor shortages, and changing customer behavior force a rethink of what retail really is. Europe is leading that shift. High operational costs and rapid transformation are pushing retailers to act faster than ever, and we’re positioned to help them do it in a scalable, low-risk way. Being Noahs-ready isn’t only about geography and necessity — it’s also about mindset. The retailers who will win this decade are the ones willing to reimagine themselves as food operators. That’s where our platform fits in: as the bridge between today’s analogue retail world and tomorrow’s fast paced food economy. Capital & Investors: Are you seeking growth capital, and if so, what kind of investors (VC, strategic, corporate) best align with your vision? We are currently finalizing our latest seed round and are well-capitalized for the current growth phase. Our next major raise — a Series A — is planned for 2026, and preparations are already underway. Right now, our focus is execution and scale. That said, we’re always open to conversations with investors who see what we see — those who understand that the future of food isn’t about building more restaurants, but about enabling the platforms that connect them. The best fit for us are partners who bring more than capital — those who share the vision of redefining food infrastructure globally and can accelerate that journey through strategic reach, technology, or market access. Vision 2030: Paint us a picture: what does a Noahs-enabled convenience store look like in 2030, and what share of its revenue will come from food vs. fuel? By 2030, the traditional service station will be unrecognizable. The era of fuel as the defining anchor is ending — what comes next will be built around food, experiences, and premium retail. We’re already seeing early signs of that leapfrog. Elon Musk’s new Tesla Diner is a perfect example — a glimpse of how technology, design, and hospitality can fuse into something people actually want to visit. That’s what excites me: not a finished blueprint, but the open canvas ahead. I prefer not to lock in a final vision. The real innovation will come from collaboration — from working with retailers, chefs, designers, and local communities to build places that fit their rhythm. Some will focus on food and digital ordering, others on community spaces or hybrid retail experiences. The beauty is that the platform allows for all of it. What I do know is that the transformation is imminent, and food will be the catalyst that starts it. Once retailers take that step, everything else follows — design, operations, social experiences, even how we define “convenience.” Over time, Noahs will simply become part of that ecosystem — the invisible layer powering whatever comes next. The real story won’t be about us. It’ll be about how retailers use this opportunity to reinvent what it means to serve their communities. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3311/unnati-unleashed-brio-hydroponics-charts-indias-climate-smart-farming-future.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3311/unnati-unleashed-brio-hydroponics-charts-indias-climate-smart-farming-future.html Wed, 08 Oct 2025 19:00:22 +0530 In this exclusive AgroSpectrum interview, Pravin Patel, Founder of Brio Hydroponics, shares how the Unnati project—a 100-acre hydroponics park in Gujarat—is poised to transform Indian agriculture from niche experimentation to mainstream, climate-smart farming. Patel discusses how Brio’s pioneering Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA) system combines global technology with local adaptation to deliver year-round, resource-efficient, high-quality produce. He highlights how Unnati not only boosts profitability for investors and farmers but also serves as a training and technology hub, enabling knowledge transfer across the country. The conversation underscores hydroponics’ potential to address climate volatility, water scarcity, and food security while creating scalable, modular solutions for smallholder farmers. Brio’s vision, Patel notes, is to position India as a global leader in sustainable agriculture by 2035, setting new benchmarks for innovation, exports, and farmer-first growth. Redefining Indian Agriculture: From Niche to Mainstream Hydroponics in India is still seen as niche compared to traditional farming. With the launch of Unnati, a 100-acre park, how do you see this project shifting perceptions—and what does it mean for the mainstreaming of soil-less farming in India? Hydroponics in India has traditionally been viewed as an expensive, niche technology primarily suited for urban enthusiasts and high-end commercial ventures. This perception stems from several factors: limited awareness among farmers, high initial capital requirements, and the dominance of traditional soil-based farming practices that have sustained Indian agriculture for millennia. However, this narrative is rapidly changing as water scarcity, climate volatility, and declining soil health create urgent demands for innovative agricultural solutions. Unnati as a Catalyst for Change The launch of Unnati, Brio Hydroponics' 100-acre park in Talod, Sabarkantha district, represents a strategic inflection point in shifting perceptions around soil-less farming. By demonstrating hydroponics at commercial scale rather than experimental plots, Unnati addresses the primary skepticism around scalability and economic viability. The project's scale brings multiple advantages: economies of production, market dominance in premium fresh produce categories, and the ability to showcase consistent, high-quality output regardless of seasonal variations. Pravin Patel, Founder of Brio Hydroponics, emphasizes that "Unnati is not just a park; it's a movement towards climate-smart agriculture. By integrating our CEA system with global best practices, we aim to liberate farmers from weather uncertainties". This positioning transforms hydroponics from a technology solution to a comprehensive agricultural philosophy that prioritizes sustainability, predictability, and profitability. Structural Changes Driving Adoption Several structural factors are accelerating the mainstream adoption of hydroponics in India. First, the increasing urbanization and growing middle-class demand for pesticide-free, fresh produce creates robust market pull. Second, government policy support through initiatives like the National Horticulture Mission and subsidies covering up to 50 per cent of hydroponic capital costs lower entry barriers. Third, the integration of digital technologies—IoT sensors, automated nutrient delivery, and AI-driven monitoring—makes hydroponic systems more accessible to farmers who previously lacked technical expertise. The Indian hydroponics market is projected to grow from $ 263.1 million in 2024 to $ 2,227 million by 2035, reflecting a robust CAGR of 21.43 per cent. This explosive growth trajectory indicates that hydroponics is transitioning from experimental technology to mainstream agricultural practice, driven by both necessity and opportunity. Indian Hydroponics Market Growth Projection (2024-2035) showing explosive growth from $ 263.1 million to $ 2,227 million with 21.43 per cent CAGR From Innovation to Scale: Deploying Breakthrough CEA Technology Brio pioneered the world’s first Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA) system. How does Unnati deploy this breakthrough differently, and what scale efficiencies can it unlock for India’s agriculture economy? Brio Hydroponics has pioneered the world's first Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA) system, which represents a fundamental breakthrough in precision farming technology. Unlike conventional hydroponics that focuses primarily on soil-less cultivation, Brio's CEA system integrates multiple environmental variables—temperature, humidity, CO₂ concentration, light spectrum, airflow, and nutrient delivery—into a unified, automated platform that optimizes plant growth at every stage. The CEA system deployed at Unnati differs significantly from traditional greenhouse operations. It incorporates global technologies sourced from France, Israel, and New Zealand, specifically adapted for Indian climatic conditions. These technologies include advanced automated irrigation systems, sophisticated climate control mechanisms, and precision nutrient delivery systems that work in harmony to maintain optimal growing conditions throughout the year, irrespective of external weather fluctuations. Scale Efficiencies and Economic Impact Unnati's 100-acre scale unlocks multiple efficiency advantages that smaller hydroponic operations cannot achieve. The infrastructure supports 100 individual hydroponic structures of one acre each, creating an industrial-grade production ecosystem. This scale enables bulk procurement of inputs, standardized operational procedures, and centralized processing and distribution systems that dramatically reduce per-unit production costs. The economic benefits extend beyond cost reduction to revenue optimization. Unnati's strategic tie-ups with retailers, e-commerce platforms, and export channels ensure that produce reaches premium markets quickly and at optimal pricing. The park's integrated business model projects Internal Rate of Return (IRR) between 18-24 per cent annually, making it attractive for both institutional and retail investors. Scale efficiencies also manifest in technology deployment and maintenance. Centralized monitoring systems can oversee multiple growing units simultaneously, reducing labor requirements while improving precision. Automated systems for irrigation, nutrient dosing, and climate control operate more efficiently when managing larger volumes, creating economies of scale that make the technology economically viable for broader adoption. Technology Transfer and Knowledge Creation Beyond immediate production benefits, Unnati serves as a technology transfer hub that demonstrates how advanced CEA systems can be replicated across different regions and scales. The project's success in its initial 30 acres under cultivation provides concrete evidence of technology viability, yield improvements, and economic returns that can be communicated to potential adopters. Brio's Center of Excellence in Gandhinagar has already trained over 500 agripreneurs, significantly enhancing agricultural skills and creating a knowledge ecosystem around hydroponic farming. This knowledge creation function becomes even more critical at Unnati's scale, where the park can serve as a demonstration site for farmers, investors, and policymakers to observe commercial-scale hydroponic operations. Hydroponics vs Traditional Farming: Key Performance Metrics Comparison showing revolutionary improvements in resource efficiency Investor Confidence in Agri-Tech: Making Hydroponics Profitable and Attractive Your early investors highlight transparency, trust, and strong returns as key drivers. How do you make hydroponics, traditionally a capital-intensive venture, both profitable and attractive for institutional and retail investors in India? Hydroponics has traditionally been perceived as a capital-intensive venture with uncertain returns, creating significant barriers for both institutional and retail investors. Brio Hydroponics addresses this challenge through multiple innovative approaches that transform the investment proposition from high-risk speculation to predictable, asset-backed returns. The company's fintech investment platform, launched in 2024, represents India's first digital fixed-return investment platform specifically tailored for the Controlled Environment Agriculture sector. This platform offers investors fixed, assured returns of up to 18 per cent per annum, exemplified by an investment of Rs 10 lakhs yielding Rs 1.8 lakhs annually. The platform has rapidly gained traction, attracting over 125 investors and demonstrating robust confidence in sustainable agricultural practices. Transparency and Trust Mechanisms Investor confidence in Brio Hydroponics stems from the company's commitment to transparency, professional execution, and proven track record. Rajesh Mehta, an Unnati investor, states: "What I value most is trust and assurance. Brio Hydroponics has consistently delivered both with professionalism, transparency, and a proven track record that gave me complete confidence". This trust is built through several mechanisms: Performance Reporting: Regular performance reports and transparent financial disclosures provide investors with real-time insights into their investments. A dedicated investor dashboard offers continuous visibility into farm operations, yield data, and financial performance, fostering trust and ongoing engagement. Agri-Partnership Model: The alignment of investor returns with farm performance ensures that both parties are motivated to achieve excellence in agricultural productivity. This partnership approach transforms investors from passive capital providers to active stakeholders in agricultural success. Proven Track Record: Brio's successful hydroponics projects for major corporate clients including Welspun Group and Adani Group demonstrate the company's capability to execute large-scale, complex agricultural projects. Risk Mitigation and Return Optimization The Unnati model incorporates several risk mitigation strategies that make hydroponics attractive for institutional and retail investors. The cluster-based farming system managed by seasoned professionals at Brio Hydroponics reduces operational risks while ensuring consistent quality and output. Climate-controlled environments eliminate weather-related crop losses, while integrated pest management systems minimize disease and pest risks. Market risk is addressed through diversified crop portfolios focusing on premium categories such as leafy greens, herbs, and exotic vegetables that command higher prices and have growing demand in urban markets. Strategic partnerships with retailers and export channels provide assured market access and pricing stability. The company's ambitious target to raise Rs 100 crores through its investment platform within the first year demonstrates significant investor appetite for structured agri-tech investments. This capital will support the development of additional hi-tech farming projects across India, creating a scalable model for sustainable agriculture investment. Climate and Food Security: Addressing India's Dual Challenge Climate and Food Security: You’ve often spoken about freeing farmers from weather uncertainty. How can hydroponics-based systems like Unnati address India’s dual challenge of climate volatility and food security—and is there a risk of this becoming a solution only for high-value crops rather than staples? India's agricultural sector faces unprecedented challenges from climate volatility, with erratic rainfall patterns, prolonged droughts, and extreme weather events becoming increasingly common. Traditional farming methods, dependent on monsoon cycles and seasonal patterns, leave farmers highly vulnerable to weather uncertainties that can devastate entire crop cycles and rural livelihoods. Research indicates that approximately 52-55 per cent of Indian farmers have no access to irrigation and depend entirely on rain-fed agriculture. This dependency becomes increasingly problematic as climate change intensifies rainfall variability, with longer dry spells followed by intense flooding periods that disrupt crop growth cycles. The Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) study found that 87 per cent of tehsils across India experienced decreased Southwest Monsoon rainfall during crucial Kharif crop sowing months from 1982 to 2022. Hydroponics as Climate Resilience Solution Controlled Environment Agriculture systems like those deployed at Unnati offer a compelling solution to climate-related agricultural risks. By creating fully controlled growing environments, hydroponic systems eliminate dependency on external weather conditions, enabling consistent, year-round production regardless of climatic variability. The technology's water efficiency is particularly crucial for India's water-stressed regions. Hydroponic systems use up to 90 per cent less water compared to traditional farming methods, making them especially valuable in drought-prone areas where water scarcity limits agricultural productivity. This efficiency is achieved through closed-loop systems that recycle nutrient solutions and eliminate water loss through soil percolation and evaporation. Climate-controlled environments also enable precise management of temperature, humidity, and CO₂ levels, optimizing plant growth conditions that would be impossible to achieve in open-field agriculture. This precision allows farmers to maintain consistent crop quality and yields even during extreme weather events that would devastate traditional farms. Food Security Implications and Staple Crop Considerations While hydroponic systems excel in producing high-value crops like leafy greens, herbs, and specialty vegetables, questions remain about their applicability to staple crops that form the foundation of Indian food security. Currently, most hydroponic operations focus on premium produce that commands higher market prices and provides better economic returns for the capital invested. However, this limitation may not necessarily represent a systemic failure. Hydroponics can contribute to food security through multiple pathways: Nutritional Enhancement: Premium crops grown hydroponically often have superior nutritional profiles and longer shelf lives, improving overall dietary quality. Market Segmentation: By serving premium market segments, hydroponics frees up traditional agricultural land for staple crop production, potentially improving overall resource allocation. Technology Evolution: As hydroponic technologies mature and costs decrease, applications to staple crops may become economically viable, particularly for crops requiring precise nutrient management. The integration of hydroponics with traditional farming systems creates complementary approaches rather than replacement scenarios. Farmers can use hydroponic systems for high-value cash crops while maintaining traditional cultivation for staple grains, diversifying their income sources and reducing overall risk exposure. Scaling Climate-Smart Solutions Brio's partnerships with institutions like Anand Agricultural University and IFFCO position the company to scale climate-smart agriculture solutions across diverse agricultural contexts. These partnerships enable research and development of hydroponic systems specifically adapted to Indian conditions, crop preferences, and farmer economics. The Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) framework emphasizes three key objectives: increasing agricultural productivity, building resilience to climate change, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Hydroponic systems align with all three objectives by delivering higher yields per unit area, eliminating weather-related risks, and reducing the need for chemical inputs that contribute to environmental degradation. Global Technologies, Local Impact: Adapting International Solutions Unnati is deploying agri-technologies from France, Israel, and New Zealand. How do you ensure these global systems adapt to India’s local conditions—water availability, smallholder economics, and diverse crop demand? Unnati's deployment of agri-technologies from France, Israel, and New Zealand represents a sophisticated approach to technology transfer that balances global innovation with local adaptation. Rather than implementing foreign technologies wholesale, Brio Hydroponics has developed a localization strategy that adapts these systems to India's specific conditions, including water availability, climate variability, smallholder economics, and diverse crop demands. The partnership with Israeli firm Pic-Plant Ltd exemplifies this approach, introducing patented technologies such as rain protection systems, wire rope configurations, and triple-layer net houses that enable high-yield, superior-quality produce across all seasons. These technologies were specifically modified to address Indian climatic challenges, including high humidity, intense heat, and monsoon conditions that differ significantly from Mediterranean growing environments. French precision agriculture technologies contribute advanced nutrient delivery systems and automated climate control mechanisms that ensure optimal growing conditions. New Zealand's expertise in post-harvest processing, traceability systems, and export quality standards helps establish supply chain excellence that meets international market requirements. Addressing Local Conditions and Constraints India's water scarcity challenges require hydroponic systems to be exceptionally efficient in water usage. The technologies deployed at Unnati incorporate closed-loop water recycling systems that minimize waste and maximize efficiency. Advanced sensors monitor soil moisture, nutrient concentrations, and pH levels in real-time, enabling precise water and nutrient delivery that eliminates overwatering and nutrient runoff. The systems are designed to operate effectively with varying water quality conditions common in Indian agricultural regions. Water treatment and purification systems ensure that even brackish or mineral-heavy water sources can be used effectively, expanding the geographic areas where hydroponic systems can be deployed successfully. Smallholder Economics and Scalability Recognizing that over 86 per cent of Indian farmers operate plots smaller than two hectares, Brio's technology adaptation focuses on scalable solutions that can be economically viable at different scales. The modular design of hydroponic structures allows farmers to start with smaller installations and expand gradually as they gain experience and capital. The company's training programs and technical support systems address the skill requirements that often prevent smallholder farmers from adopting advanced technologies. By providing comprehensive training modules, ongoing technical assistance, and standardized operating procedures, Brio reduces the knowledge barriers that traditionally limit technology adoption among resource-constrained farmers. Diverse Crop Demand and Market Integration India's diverse culinary traditions and regional crop preferences require hydroponic systems to be adaptable to multiple crop types beyond the leafy greens and herbs commonly grown in other countries. Unnati's systems are configured to grow 28 different kinds of leafy greens and various vine crops including colored capsicums, cherry tomatoes, cucumbers, and French beans. This crop diversity requires sophisticated nutrient management systems that can adjust growing conditions for different plant families and growth stages. The integration of AI-driven monitoring and automated nutrient delivery enables precise management of these diverse crop requirements within the same facility. Technology Integration and Digital Infrastructure The adaptation of global technologies to Indian conditions involves significant integration with digital infrastructure and IoT systems. Unnati incorporates sensors for monitoring electrical conductivity, pH levels, temperature, and humidity, with wireless sensor nodes transmitting data to central control units for real-time monitoring and adjustments. This digital integration aligns with India's Digital Agriculture Mission and AgriStack infrastructure, creating synergies between private sector innovation and public sector digital platforms. The integration enables farmers to access satellite-based weather advisories, market information, and technical support through unified digital interfaces. Blockchain technology is being explored for supply chain transparency and traceability, enabling Unnati's produce to meet international export standards and command premium prices in global markets. This technological sophistication transforms Indian hydroponic produce from local agricultural products to globally competitive commodities. Partnerships as Growth Drivers: Scaling Through Collaboration With alliances like Anand Agricultural University and IFFCO, you’re building strong institutional linkages. What role do you see public–private partnerships playing in scaling hydroponics nationwide, and how do you plan to integrate smallholder farmers into this high-tech ecosystem? Brio Hydroponics' partnerships with Anand Agricultural University, IFFCO, and other institutions represent a strategic approach to scaling hydroponics technology across India's agricultural landscape. These partnerships provide multiple benefits: research and development capabilities, institutional credibility, access to farmer networks, and policy influence that facilitates technology adoption at scale. The collaboration with Anand Agricultural University, located in Gujarat's agricultural heartland, provides research expertise in crop sciences, soil health, and agricultural engineering. This partnership enables the development of region-specific hydroponic solutions that address local crop preferences, growing conditions, and farmer requirements. University research facilities support ongoing innovation in nutrient formulations, crop varieties, and system optimization. IFFCO's involvement brings significant advantages in terms of farmer outreach, input supply chains, and cooperative structure expertise. As one of India's largest fertilizer cooperatives, IFFCO has extensive networks reaching millions of farmers across the country. This partnership enables Brio to leverage existing distribution channels, farmer relationships, and cooperative structures to introduce hydroponic technologies at grassroots levels. Public-Private Partnership Model The public-private partnership approach adopted by Brio creates synergies between government policy objectives and private sector innovation capabilities. Government initiatives like the National Horticulture Mission, Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana, and subsidies for controlled environment agriculture provide policy support and financial incentives that reduce adoption barriers. These partnerships enable Brio to participate in government programs that provide technical assistance, financial subsidies, and market linkages to farmers adopting advanced agricultural technologies. The alignment with national agricultural policies ensures that Brio's expansion strategy supports broader government objectives of agricultural modernization, water conservation, and climate resilience. The integration with India's Digital Agriculture Mission creates opportunities for Brio's technologies to be incorporated into national digital infrastructure for agriculture. This integration can provide farmers with access to hydroponic technologies through existing government platforms, reducing the complexity and cost of technology adoption. Smallholder Integration Strategy Integrating smallholder farmers into high-tech hydroponic ecosystems requires careful attention to economic constraints, technical capabilities, and risk management preferences. Brio's approach involves multiple strategies designed to make advanced technologies accessible to resource-constrained farmers: Modular Technology Design: Hydroponic systems are designed in modular units that allow farmers to start with small installations and expand gradually. This approach reduces initial capital requirements while enabling farmers to gain experience and build confidence with the technology. Training and Capacity Building: Comprehensive training programs provide farmers with technical skills required for hydroponic operations. Brio's Training & Placement Assistance program offers two-week intensive training followed by ongoing technical support, ensuring farmers have the knowledge needed for successful operations. Financial Support and Risk Sharing: The fintech investment platform and agri-partnership models provide alternative financing mechanisms that reduce financial risks for smallholder farmers. Investors can provide capital while farmers contribute land and labor, sharing both risks and returns. Cooperative Integration: Working with existing farmer producer organizations (FPOs) and cooperative structures enables smallholder farmers to access hydroponic technologies collectively, sharing costs and risks while maintaining individual farming operations. Technology Transfer and Knowledge Dissemination Brio's partnership strategy includes significant emphasis on knowledge transfer and skill development. The Center of Excellence in Gandhinagar has trained over 500 agripreneurs, creating a network of skilled practitioners who can support technology diffusion across agricultural communities. This knowledge dissemination approach creates multiplier effects, where trained farmers become technology advocates and informal advisors for their communities. The demonstration effect of successful hydroponic operations encourages broader adoption while providing peer-to-peer learning opportunities that are often more effective than formal training programs. The partnerships also facilitate technology standardization and quality assurance, ensuring that hydroponic systems deployed across different regions maintain consistent performance standards. This standardization is crucial for scaling technology adoption while maintaining quality and economic viability. Beyond Gujarat: National and Global Expansion Strategy With Unnati now underway, what’s your national and global expansion strategy? Do you envision replicating this park model across states—or building smaller modular units that could integrate into farmer clusters? Brio Hydroponics' expansion strategy beyond Gujarat involves both replicating the large-scale park model and developing smaller, modular units that can integrate into existing farmer clusters. The success of Unnati's initial 30 acres under cultivation provides a proven template that can be adapted to different geographic and economic contexts across India. The company has already acquired land for expansion projects, including 36 acres near Mumbai with potential scaling to 60 acres, demonstrating commitment to geographic diversification. This expansion strategy focuses on proximity to major urban centers where demand for premium, pesticide-free produce is highest and supply chain logistics can be optimized. The expansion approach recognizes that different regions have varying requirements based on climate conditions, water availability, crop preferences, and market dynamics. Rather than implementing identical systems, Brio adapts its core CEA technology platform to local conditions while maintaining standardized operational procedures and quality standards. Modular Integration Strategy Beyond large-scale parks, Brio is developing smaller modular units designed to integrate into existing farmer clusters and cooperative structures. This approach addresses the reality that most Indian farmers operate small plots and may not have the capital or inclination to participate in large-scale commercial operations. Modular systems can be deployed at village levels, serving clusters of 10-20 farmers who collectively invest in hydroponic infrastructure while maintaining individual farming operations. This approach leverages existing social structures and cooperative traditions while introducing advanced agricultural technologies. The modular approach also enables faster deployment and lower per-unit capital requirements, making hydroponic technology accessible to a broader range of farmers and geographic locations. Standardized modules can be manufactured centrally and assembled locally, reducing costs and complexity while maintaining quality standards. International Expansion and Export Focus Brio's international expansion strategy includes both technology export and produce export components. The company has already established operations in the Maldives and is finalizing projects in Mauritius and the Caribbean islands. This international expansion leverages India's growing reputation in agricultural technology and Brio's proven expertise in tropical and subtropical growing conditions. The export strategy focuses on regions where water scarcity, limited arable land, or challenging growing conditions make hydroponic systems particularly valuable. Small island nations, desert regions, and urban areas in developing countries represent priority markets where Brio's technologies can address critical food security challenges. International expansion also creates opportunities for technology transfer partnerships with foreign governments and development organizations. Brio's experience in adapting global technologies to local conditions positions the company as a valuable partner for agricultural development projects in emerging markets. Digital Platform and Franchise Model The expansion strategy includes development of digital platforms that enable remote monitoring, technical support, and market linkages for distributed hydroponic operations. These platforms can support franchise-style expansion where local entrepreneurs operate hydroponic systems under Brio's technical guidance and quality standards. Digital platforms enable centralized monitoring of multiple sites, standardized operating procedures, and quality assurance systems that maintain brand consistency across geographic locations. Remote monitoring capabilities reduce the need for physical presence while ensuring optimal system performance. The franchise model creates opportunities for local entrepreneurship while maintaining technical standards and market access. Local operators benefit from Brio's proven systems, training programs, and market linkages while adapting operations to local conditions and preferences. The 2035 Vision: India's Model for Climate-Smart Agriculture If we project a decade ahead, what does success for Brio Hydroponics look like? Is it thousands of acres of soil-less farming, a farmer-first export powerhouse, or becoming India’s model for climate-smart agriculture? By 2035, Brio Hydroponics envisions a transformational impact on India's agricultural landscape that extends far beyond the current scale of operations. The company's vision encompasses three interconnected dimensions: massive scaling of soil-less farming infrastructure, establishment of India as a farmer-first export powerhouse, and creation of a replicable model for climate-smart agriculture that can be deployed globally. The scaling vision projects thousands of acres under hydroponic cultivation across multiple states, supported by a network of technology centers, training facilities, and processing hubs. This infrastructure would serve both commercial operations and smallholder farmers, creating an integrated ecosystem that supports diverse scales and types of agricultural operations. Market projections support this ambitious vision, with India's hydroponics market expected to reach $ 2,227 million by 2035, representing a 21.43 per cent compound annual growth rate. This explosive growth trajectory indicates that hydroponics will transition from niche technology to mainstream agricultural practice, driven by water scarcity, climate change, and increasing demand for premium produce. Farmer-First Export Powerhouse Model The 2035 vision positions India as a global leader in hydroponic produce exports, with farmer prosperity at the center of the value chain. This farmer-first approach ensures that technology advancement translates into improved livelihoods for agricultural communities rather than simply benefiting large corporate operations. The export powerhouse model leverages India's competitive advantages in agricultural innovation, skilled technical workforce, and growing expertise in controlled environment agriculture. By 2035, Brio envisions Indian hydroponic produces competing successfully in premium international markets, commanding prices that reflect superior quality, traceability, and sustainable production methods. This export focus requires significant investment in post-harvest infrastructure, cold chain logistics, and quality certification systems. The integration of blockchain technology for supply chain transparency and adherence to international organic and sustainability standards will enable Indian hydroponic produce to access the highest-value global markets. Climate-Smart Agriculture Leadership The broader vision positions India as a global model for climate-smart agriculture that other developing countries can emulate. This leadership role involves several components: technology innovation, policy framework development, institutional capacity building, and international cooperation. India's experience in adapting global hydroponic technologies to local conditions, integrating smallholder farmers into high-tech systems, and scaling sustainable agriculture practices provides valuable lessons for other developing countries facing similar challenges. The knowledge and systems developed through projects like Unnati can be transferred to other regions through technical cooperation programs and development partnerships. The climate-smart agriculture model emphasizes three key outcomes: Productivity Enhancement: Hydroponic systems consistently deliver higher yields per unit area while using fewer resources, contributing to food security without expanding agricultural land use. Climate Resilience: Controlled environment agriculture systems eliminate weather-related risks and enable consistent production despite increasing climate variability. Environmental Sustainability: Reduced water usage, elimination of soil degradation, and minimized chemical inputs create agricultural systems that support rather than degrade environmental health. Technology Integration and Digital Agriculture The 2035 vision includes comprehensive integration of hydroponic systems with India's digital agriculture infrastructure, creating seamless connectivity between controlled environment agriculture and broader agricultural support systems. This integration enables farmers to access weather advisories, market information, technical support, and financial services through unified digital platforms. Artificial intelligence and machine learning systems will optimize hydroponic operations by analyzing vast datasets on plant growth, environmental conditions, and market demand to make real-time adjustments that maximize productivity and profitability. These systems will enable predictive management that anticipates and prevents problems before they impact crop production. The digital integration also enables new forms of agricultural finance and insurance that are specifically designed for controlled environment agriculture. Satellite monitoring, IoT sensors, and blockchain verification can provide the data transparency needed for innovative financial products that reduce risks for both farmers and lenders. Institutional and Policy Framework Achieving the 2035 vision requires supportive institutional and policy frameworks that encourage innovation, facilitate technology adoption, and ensure that benefits reach smallholder farmers. Brio's partnerships with agricultural universities, government agencies, and international organizations create a foundation for policy advocacy and institutional development. The vision includes establishment of specialized training institutions, research centers, and extension services focused on controlled environment agriculture. These institutions would provide the technical expertise, research capabilities, and farmer support services needed to sustain rapid expansion of hydroponic systems across India. Policy frameworks need to address regulatory standards for hydroponic produce, quality certification systems, and trade policies that facilitate exports. The integration of hydroponics into existing agricultural support programs, including subsidies, insurance, and market linkages, will ensure that the technology remains accessible to farmers of all scales. A New Era of Agricultural Innovation Brio Hydroponics' Unnati project represents more than an agricultural venture; it embodies a comprehensive transformation of how India approaches food production, climate resilience, and rural prosperity. Through the strategic deployment of controlled environment agriculture at unprecedented scale, Brio is creating a replicable model that addresses India's most pressing agricultural challenges while establishing pathways for global leadership in sustainable farming technologies. The answers to these critical questions reveal that hydroponics in India is transitioning from experimental technology to mainstream agricultural practice, driven by necessity, opportunity, and visionary leadership. The success of Unnati and similar projects will determine whether India can achieve its vision of climate-smart, sustainable agriculture that serves both farmers and consumers while protecting environmental resources for future generations. The convergence of technological innovation, strategic partnerships, supportive policies, and market demand creates unprecedented opportunities for transforming Indian agriculture. Brio Hydroponics' leadership in this transformation positions the company—and India—at the forefront of a global agricultural revolution that promises to redefine how the world produces food in an era of climate change and resource scarcity. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3304/banned-in-europe-essential-in-india-global-regulatory-dilemma-of-mancozeb.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3304/banned-in-europe-essential-in-india-global-regulatory-dilemma-of-mancozeb.html Tue, 07 Oct 2025 18:09:00 +0530 Mancozeb, that ubiquitous arbiter of phytopathological destiny, continues to bestride the globe as an indispensable fungicidal panacea, even as the European Union has cast it into regulatory obsolescence on grounds of speculative toxicology. Its multisite mode of action, coupled with an enviable paucity of resistance development, renders it indispensable for high-value horticultural and agronomic commodities—from India’s grapes and potatoes to Latin America’s bananas and Brazil’s soybeans. Yet the global regulatory tableau is a patchwork of prudence and profligacy: while North America permits its judicious deployment, India confronts an incomplete evidentiary edifice and the concomitant peril to trade and farmer livelihoods. Empirical case studies elucidate the stark economic and agronomic ramifications of an abrupt excision—diminished yields, escalated input costs, and disrupted export flows—which may well outweigh the conjectural health risks if employed under Good Agricultural Practices. Mancozeb thus embodies the quintessential conundrum of contemporary agriculture: the delicate dialectic between human health, agronomic imperatives, and global food security in an era of climate volatility and international interdependence. Mancozeb, an ethylene-bis-dithiocarbamate (EBDC), stands as one of the globe’s most extensively employed fungicides, esteemed for its broad-spectrum efficacy and remarkable cost-efficiency. Its multisite mode of action allows it to inhibit diverse fungal metabolic pathways, rendering the emergence of resistance exceedingly improbable. In an era in which crop diseases are evolving at a pace that outstrips chemical interventions, Mancozeb has remained an unwavering ally of farmers across continents. Yet, paradoxically, while it is proscribed in the European Union, it remains indispensable in India, Latin America, and other burgeoning agricultural economies. This regulatory disjunction epitomises a global dilemma: the delicate reconciliation of human health imperatives with the exigencies of agricultural productivity and food security. Mancozeb: A Fungicide with Global Reach Across the globe, Mancozeb finds application on a vast array of crops, from the potato fields and vineyards of India and the United Kingdom, to the banana plantations of Latin America, and the sprawling soybean belts of Brazil. Its paramount advantage lies in its multisite mode of action, whereby it simultaneously impedes multiple fungal metabolic pathways. Unlike systemic fungicides, which assail a solitary enzyme or receptor and thus succumb readily to pathogen adaptation, Mancozeb would necessitate the improbable mutation of myriad genes for resistance to arise. It is this very characteristic that has enshrined it as a cornerstone of integrated disease management, frequently deployed in concert with systemic fungicides to combat recalcitrant pathogens such as Plasmopara viticola, the agent responsible for downy mildew in grapes. According to statistics furnished by the Indian government, India alone produces an estimated 500,000 million tonnes of Mancozeb annually, available in a spectrum of formulations including 35% SC, 75% WG, and 75% WP. Beyond Indian shores, Mancozeb retains pre-eminence in the control of potato diseases in the U.K., bananas across Central and South America, and soybeans in Brazil. Its exceptional versatility, coupled with an affordability—generally ranging between $5 and $10 per kilogram—renders it indispensable not only to smallholder farmers but also to large-scale agribusiness enterprises, bridging the imperatives of economic prudence and agricultural efficacy. To understand Mancozeb’s global position, it is important to compare it with alternative fungicides: Fungicide TypeMode of ActionResistance RiskEnvironmental ImpactCost (USD/kg)MancozebMultisite inhibitorLowLow5–10BiofungicidesBiological controlVery LowVery Low15–25Copper FungicidesContact protectantModerateModerate10–20SDHI FungicidesSpecific enzyme inhibitorHighLow20–30 Source: ACS Agricultural Science & Technology, 2022; FAO Pesticide Data Regulatory Landscape: A Global Patchwork Mancozeb’s regulatory status varies sharply across regions, reflecting differences in risk assessment, agricultural priorities, and market sensitivity. European Union On the 14th of December, 2020, the European Commission promulgated Regulation (EU) 2020/2087, thereby proscribing the use of mancozeb, predicated upon its classification as a potential endocrine disruptor. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), whilst acknowledging the lacunae inherent in compound-specific analytical methodologies, nonetheless proceeded with the prohibition, invoking the precautionary principle as the lodestar of its regulatory reasoning. Although the European Union has rescinded approval, mancozeb continues to enjoy provisional sanction within the United Kingdom until the 31st of January, 2024. This interdiction has reverberated across the corridors of global commerce, for EU residue thresholds now exert a determinative influence upon exporters in India, Latin America, and sundry other trading partners, thereby entwining scientific prudence with the imperatives of international agrarian trade. United States In contradistinction, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has undertaken successive and scrupulous evaluations of mancozeb, ultimately adjudging that the acute, chronic, and carcinogenic dietary risks remain comfortably beneath the threshold of concern, provided the compound is employed in strict accordance with label directives. The EPA’s re-registration exercise of 2005 reaffirmed mancozeb’s safety profile, highlighting its negligible acute toxicity and the acceptably circumscribed risk associated with ETU metabolites, which frequently feature in toxicological disputations. A consonant appraisal has been rendered by Canadian authorities, who have sanctioned its continued utilisation within a framework of regulated oversight. India India, as the preeminent global purveyor of Mancozeb, finds itself ensnared in a regulatory quagmire of considerable complexity. In 2020, the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare embarked upon a comprehensive review of Mancozeb, alongside twenty-six other agrochemicals, contemplating a prospective proscription. Critics, however, have decried the preliminary assessments as lamentably partial, predicated solely upon thyroid profiles from a singular locus, devoid of the rigorous crop residue analyses requisite for an informed decision. A constellation of Indian stakeholders—including the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), the Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA), farmers’ collectives, and agrochemical enterprises—have championed a measured, evidence-driven approach. They underscore that an abrupt excision of Mancozeb could imperil the export viability of table grapes, potatoes, and other high-value horticultural commodities, with attendant repercussions on both agrarian livelihoods and the nation’s foreign exchange inflows. Economic and Trade Implications Globally, Mancozeb undergirds the livelihoods of millions of agrarians and contributes billions of dollars to agricultural export revenues. In India, for instance, table grapes and potatoes—both high-value export commodities—rely extensively upon Mancozeb for efficacious disease management. Downy mildew in grapes and early and late blight in potatoes can wreak havoc on yields if left unchecked, and projections indicate that the excision of Mancozeb could truncate output by 20 to 30 per cent per hectare. Such a diminution would reverberate through India’s export markets, particularly the European Union, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia, potentially eroding the nation’s competitive advantage and diminishing foreign exchange inflows derived from horticultural exports. The scenario in Latin America is no less grave, especially in the context of banana cultivation. Black sigatoka, engendered by Mycosphaerella fijiensis, exhibits formidable resistance to many fungicidal interventions, rendering EBDCs such as Mancozeb the most efficacious recourse. Withdrawal of this fungicide would likely escalate production costs by up to 30 per cent, as cultivators would be compelled to substitute either costlier or less effective alternatives, while yields might concomitantly decline due to suboptimal disease control. Such perturbations could undermine the global competitiveness of Latin American bananas, imperiling both large-scale exporters and the smallholder farmers whose very sustenance is entwined with this crop. In the United Kingdom, Mancozeb plays an indispensable role in potato cultivation, with over 90 per cent of the crop area routinely treated to mitigate the twin threats of late and early blight. Bereft of Mancozeb, farmers would be compelled to deploy alternative fungicides, such as SDHIs or strobilurins, which are not only more costly but also prone to engendering resistance. This substitution could conceivably double per-hectare fungicide expenditures, compressing margins within an already fiercely competitive agricultural sector. Brazilian soybean cultivation further exemplifies the global ramifications. Soybeans, a strategic commodity in both domestic and international markets, are vulnerable to diseases such as Asian soybean rust, which can inflict severe yield losses. Mancozeb has demonstrably curtailed disease incidence by 60 to 70 per cent in field trials, preserving both output volume and quality. Its withdrawal would imperil yield stability, destabilise global supply chains, and amplify dependence upon costlier, single-target fungicides, thereby exacerbating resistance pressures over time. Collectively, these vignettes underscore Mancozeb’s remarkable economic efficacy. It furnishes broad-spectrum disease control at modest cost, with minimal risk of resistance evolution, rendering it indispensable for both high-value and staple crops alike. The prospective consequences of its removal extend beyond mere yield diminution: they encompass escalated input costs, heightened financial vulnerability for farmers, and potential disruption of international trade flows. When juxtaposed with the posited health risks—which, under judicious adherence to Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), remain largely negligible—the economic and food security imperatives of sustaining Mancozeb arguably outweigh the speculative hazards, thereby accentuating the necessity for a nuanced, evidence-based regulatory paradigm. Conclusion Mancozeb occupies a singular and paradoxical nexus at the confluence of agriculture, public health, and international commerce—prohibited in Europe, yet indispensable across India, Latin America, and other emerging agrarian economies. Its multisite mode of action, combined with economic prudence and broad-spectrum disease control, renders it an essential instrument for safeguarding high-value crops such as grapes, bananas, potatoes, and soybeans. Global case studies consistently illuminate a salient truth: precipitous prohibitions risk imperilling both food security and economic resilience. While toxicological apprehensions warrant meticulous management and sustained scholarly inquiry, an indiscriminate withdrawal devoid of nuanced risk assessment could paradoxically engender greater detriment—manifesting as yield contractions, escalated market prices, and the erosion of farmer livelihoods. Confronted with the twin imperatives of climate change and the relentless emergence of phytopathogens, alongside the exacting demands of global trade standards, Mancozeb exemplifies the delicate equilibrium between scientific circumspection and pragmatic stewardship. Its narrative transcends the mere pharmacology of a fungicide; it epitomises the broader dialectic of global food security, responsible agrochemical governance, and harmonised regulatory praxis in an intricately interdependent world. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3303/from-soil-to-carbon-credits-why-biochar-could-be-global-souths-climate-advantage.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3303/from-soil-to-carbon-credits-why-biochar-could-be-global-souths-climate-advantage.html Tue, 07 Oct 2025 12:34:57 +0530 Exclusive to Agrospectrum, Dr. Nripanka Das, Subject Matter Expert in Carbon Projects (UAE), explains why biochar is emerging as the “engineered permanence” solution in a carbon market searching for credibility, durability, and fair valuation. He highlights biochar’s dual advantage of long-term carbon sequestration and soil regeneration, a combination that delivers stacked financial and agronomic benefits. Scaling beyond pilots, he stresses, will require modular pyrolysis technology, aggregated demand, and blended finance models that de-risk large capital investments. Dr. Das argues that early movers can benefit from current price volatility by building high-quality, premium projects with strong verification systems. He also emphasizes the leadership role of India and Africa, where agricultural residues, traditional knowledge, and policy momentum could turn these regions into global biochar hubs. Looking ahead to 2035, he envisions biochar credits becoming exchange-traded, fully integrated into national carbon inventories, and a cornerstone of regenerative agriculture worldwide. Setting the Context – Carbon Market Inflection Point Carbon markets are undergoing a reset, with debates on credibility, permanence, and fair valuation. Where does biochar sit within this rapidly shifting landscape? Biochar occupies a unique position in the carbon market reset precisely because it addresses the three core concerns driving this transformation: credibility, permanence and fair valuation. Unlike nature- based solutions that face reversibility risks or technological solutions with high energy penalties, biochar offers what I call "engineered permanence" - carbon sequestration that can be measured, verified and guaranteed for centuries. From a credibility standpoint, biochar's carbon accounting is remarkably straightforward compared to forestry projects. We can directly measure the carbon content of the biochar (typically 70-85 per cent by mass), apply well-established permanence factors (0.8-0.95 depending on feedstock and pyrolysis conditions), and calculate net sequestration with minimal uncertainty. The IPCC guidelines provide clear methodologies, and third-party verification is becoming standardized through protocols like Verra's VM0044 and Gold Standard's biochar methodology. The permanence question is where biochar truly differentiates itself. While forest carbon can be released through fires, disease, or land-use change, biochar's aromatic carbon structure resists decomposition for 100-1000+ years in soil. Recent research using radiocarbon dating of ancient biochar deposits confirms this stability. We're not dealing with biological permanence that depends on ecosystem management - we're dealing with chemical permanence based on molecular structure. Unlike forestry or renewable projects, biochar offers both carbon sequestration and soil regeneration. Do you see this duality as its biggest differentiator in carbon finance? Absolutely. This duality creates what economists call "stacked benefits" that fundamentally change the value proposition. Traditional carbon projects generate single revenue streams, but biochar creates multiple value cascades: carbon credits, soil productivity improvements, reduced fertilizer requirements, enhanced water retention and often waste management solutions. From a financial modeling perspective, this changes the entire risk-return profile. A forestry project might generate $10-50 per hectare annually from carbon credits alone. A well-designed biochar project can generate $50-150 per hectare from carbon credits, plus 10-30 per cent yield improvements worth $200-800 per hectare annually, plus reduced input costs of $50-200 per hectare. The total economic value can exceed $1000 per hectare annually in high-value crop systems. This stacking effect also provides revenue diversification that reduces project risk. If carbon prices decline, the agricultural benefits maintain project viability. If crop prices fall, carbon revenues provide a floor. This risk mitigation is crucial for attracting institutional capital at scale. Economics of Biochar – Scaling Beyond Pilots Many biochar projects remain stuck at the pilot or grant stage. What will it take—policy, price signals, or blended finance—to move biochar into commercial scale deployment? The scaling challenge is fundamentally about crossing what I call the "commercial valley of death" - the gap between demonstration-scale projects (1-10 tonnes/year) and commercial-scale operations (1000+ tonnes/year). This requires addressing three critical barriers simultaneously. First, we need production cost reduction through economies of scale. Current small-scale pyrolysis systems produce biochar at $800-1500 per tonne. Commercial-scale continuous pyrolysis systems can achieve $300-600 per tonne, but require $2-10 million capital investments. The key is developing modular, standardized systems that can achieve economies of scale while maintaining deployment flexibility. Second, we need aggregated demand that justifies large-scale production. This means moving beyond individual farm applications to landscape-scale programs. Successful models are emerging in regions like Queensland, Australia, where government programs aggregate demand across thousands of farmers, creating predictable off-take agreements that justify commercial-scale production investments. Third, we need blended finance structures that address the unique risk profile of biochar projects. These projects have high upfront capital requirements, long payback periods, and revenue streams that depend on both carbon markets and agricultural outcomes. Development finance institutions are beginning to structure facilities that combine concessional debt for capital equipment, carbon credit advance purchase agreements, and agricultural insurance products. Policy plays a crucial enabling role, but it's not sufficient alone. We need carbon pricing that reflects biochar's true permanence value, agricultural policies that recognize soil carbon benefits, and waste management policies that create feedstock supply certainty. Current credit prices for biochar vary widely, from $50 to $150 per tonne of CO₂ equivalent. Is this volatility a barrier or an opportunity for early movers? This volatility reflects market immaturity rather than fundamental value uncertainty and it's definitely an opportunity for sophisticated early movers who understand the underlying value drivers. The price variation stems from several factors: different methodologies (some include only sequestration, others include avoided emissions), varying permanence assumptions, different co- benefit valuations, and buyer preferences for specific project types or geographies. Projects using agricultural residues in developing countries might trade at $50-80, while projects using purpose-grown biomass with comprehensive monitoring might command $120-150. Early movers can capitalize on this volatility through several strategies. First, they can develop projects that qualify for premium pricing by investing in robust monitoring, verification, and co-benefit quantification. Second, they can use forward contracting to lock in current high prices for future delivery. Third, they can build portfolios across different project types and geographies to capture price arbitrage opportunities. The volatility will decrease as markets mature and standardization improves, but early movers who establish quality projects now will benefit from both current premium pricing and future volume scaling. Policy, Standards, and Market Integrity The Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets (ICVCM) is pushing for stricter Core Carbon Principles. How ready is biochar to meet these new benchmarks? Biochar is exceptionally well-positioned to meet ICVCM's Core Carbon Principles, arguably better than most nature-based solutions. Let me address each principle specifically: Real and Additional: Biochar projects demonstrate clear additionality because biochar production requires intentional investment in pyrolysis infrastructure. The counterfactual scenario (burning or decomposing biomass) releases carbon, making the additionality calculation straightforward. Quantified and Verified: Biochar's carbon content can be directly measured using established analytical methods (elemental analysis, thermogravimetric analysis). Unlike forestry projects that rely on growth models and sampling, biochar quantification is based on direct measurement of the final product. Permanent: This is biochar's strongest suit. The aromatic carbon structure provides chemical permanence that doesn't depend on ongoing management or ecosystem stability. Recent studies using advanced analytical techniques confirm minimal decomposition rates over decades. Unique: Biochar credits represent specific, measurable quantities of carbon sequestered in identifiable locations, with clear chain of custody from feedstock to final application. The main challenge is ensuring robust monitoring and verification systems, particularly for smallholder applications. However, emerging technologies like blockchain-based tracking, satellite monitoring, and mobile soil testing are making comprehensive verification increasingly feasible and cost-effective. The EU and U.S. are advancing climate-smart agriculture incentives. Do you see India or Africa building similar policy ecosystems to accelerate biochar adoption? India and Africa are developing policy frameworks, but with different approaches that reflect their unique agricultural and economic contexts. India's approach is emerging through multiple channels. The National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture includes soil health improvement programs that could incorporate biochar. The Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana focuses on water use efficiency, where biochar's water retention properties provide clear benefits. Most importantly, India's updated Nationally Determined Contribution includes soil carbon sequestration targets that biochar can help achieve. The key difference is that India is likely to emphasize domestic production using agricultural residues, particularly rice husks and sugarcane bagasse. This addresses both the stubble burning problem in Punjab and Haryana and creates rural employment opportunities. The policy framework will likely combine pollution control mandates with carbon market incentives. Africa's approach varies by region, but several countries are developing innovative frameworks. Kenya's Climate Smart Agriculture Strategy explicitly mentions biochar. Ghana is piloting biochar programs through its Cocoa Board, using cocoa pod husks. South Africa is integrating biochar into its carbon tax framework. The African approach tends to emphasize smallholder aggregation and community-based production models. This reflects the reality of fragmented land holdings but also creates opportunities for more inclusive value distribution. The Farmer and the Field – Ground Realities In regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, where agriculture is fragmented, how can biochar projects aggregate farmers at scale without losing credibility in monitoring and reporting? Successful aggregation in fragmented agricultural systems requires what I call "nested verification" - combining high-tech monitoring at the landscape scale with simplified protocols at the farm scale. The key is developing hub-and-spoke models where centralized pyrolysis facilities serve multiple farming communities within a 50-100 km radius. This allows for standardized biochar production and quality control while maintaining local feedstock sourcing and application. For monitoring and verification, we're implementing three-tier systems: Tier 1 - Production Monitoring: Centralized facilities use continuous monitoring systems to track feedstock inputs, pyrolysis conditions, and biochar outputs. This provides precise data on carbon content and production volumes. Tier 2 - Distribution Tracking: Blockchain-based systems track biochar from production to farm-level application. Farmers receive QR-coded bags that link to specific production batches and carbon content data. Tier 3 - Application Verification: Satellite monitoring combined with statistical sampling verifies application patterns and soil carbon changes. Mobile soil testing units conduct periodic verification across representative farm plots. This approach maintains credibility while keeping farmer participation costs low. Farmers don't need sophisticated monitoring equipment - they simply document application using mobile apps that integrate with the broader tracking system. Successful examples include the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project, which aggregates over 60,000 smallholder farmers, and pilot programs in Maharashtra, India, that combine biochar with existing farmer producer organization structures. Global South Leadership & Geopolitics Biochar has deep roots in traditional practices like terra preta in the Amazon and tribal methods in India. Can the Global South position biochar not just as a climate tool, but as a cultural and ecological export to global markets? Absolutely. The Global South has a unique opportunity to position biochar as "indigenous climate technology" - combining traditional knowledge with modern carbon markets to create both economic and cultural value. Terra preta soils in the Amazon demonstrate biochar's effectiveness over centuries, providing scientific validation for traditional practices. Similarly, traditional charcoal-making and soil amendment practices across Africa and Asia offer proven implementation models that can be scaled and modernized. This creates several strategic advantages. First, it positions Global South countries as technology leaders rather than technology recipients. Second, it creates intellectual property opportunities around traditional knowledge systems. Third, it enables premium pricing for "heritage biochar" that combines carbon sequestration with cultural preservation. The key is developing certification systems that recognize and reward traditional knowledge while ensuring modern monitoring and verification standards. Programs like the Indigenous Carbon Credits initiative in Australia provide models for combining traditional practices with contemporary carbon markets. From a market positioning perspective, this could create differentiated product categories: "Amazonian terra preta biochar," "African traditional biochar," or "Indian tribal biochar" that command premium prices based on cultural heritage and proven effectiveness. With China, the EU, and the U.S. racing to secure carbon removal pathways, where do you see India and Africa positioning themselves in the global biochar economy? India and Africa have the potential to become the "Saudi Arabia of biochar" due to abundant biomass resources, low production costs, and growing technical capabilities. However, success requires strategic positioning rather than simply competing on cost. India's strategy should focus on becoming the global hub for biochar technology and services. With strong engineering capabilities, abundant agricultural residues, and growing carbon market expertise, India can develop and export both biochar products and production technologies. The key is moving up the value chain from raw biochar production to engineered biochar products, monitoring systems, and project development services. Africa's opportunity lies in premium biochar production combined with landscape-scale carbon sequestration programs. African biochar can command premium prices due to high-quality feedstocks, traditional production knowledge, and significant co-benefits for soil restoration and food security. The focus should be on developing regional biochar exchanges and certification systems that capture maximum value. Both regions should avoid the "resource curse" trap of simply exporting raw materials. Instead, they should develop integrated value chains that include feedstock production, biochar manufacturing, application services, and carbon credit development. This creates local employment while capturing maximum value from the global carbon economy. The geopolitical dimension is crucial. As developed countries face increasing pressure to achieve net- zero targets, they'll need massive carbon removal capacity. India and Africa can position themselves as essential partners in global climate goals while building domestic green economies. Looking Ahead – The Next Decade If we fast forward to 2035, what would a successful biochar-carbon market ecosystem look like? Widespread farmer adoption? Exchange-traded biochar credits? Integration into national carbon inventories? By 2035, I envision a mature biochar ecosystem with several key characteristics: Standardized Production and Trading: Biochar will be traded as a standardized commodity with established quality grades, similar to how agricultural commodities are traded today. Exchange-traded biochar credits will provide price discovery and risk management tools, with futures markets enabling long-term planning. Integrated Agricultural Systems: Biochar application will be standard practice in regenerative agriculture systems, integrated with precision agriculture technologies. Farmers will receive real-time recommendations on biochar application rates based on soil sensors, satellite data, and AI-driven optimization systems. National Carbon Accounting: Biochar will be fully integrated into national greenhouse gas inventories and carbon accounting systems. Countries will include biochar sequestration in their NDC reporting, with standardized monitoring and verification protocols. Technology Integration: Advanced pyrolysis systems will be integrated with renewable energy infrastructure, waste management systems, and agricultural processing facilities. Mobile pyrolysis units will serve remote agricultural areas, while large-scale facilities will anchor regional biochar production hubs. Financial Market Maturation: Biochar projects will access mainstream capital markets through green bonds, carbon credit securitization, and agricultural investment funds. Insurance products will cover production risks, carbon permanence, and agricultural performance. The successful ecosystem will be characterized by seamless integration across the value chain - from feedstock production through biochar manufacturing, application, monitoring, and carbon credit trading. This integration will create a self-reinforcing cycle where carbon revenues support agricultural productivity improvements, which in turn generate more feedstock for biochar production. Most importantly, biochar will have evolved from a niche climate solution to a fundamental component of sustainable agriculture and carbon management systems worldwide. These responses reflect deep technical understanding while addressing the practical realities of scaling biochar in global carbon markets. ---- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3282/turning-climate-risk-into-opportunity-dr-godefroy-grosjean-and-ena-derenoncourt-on-ethiopias-green-finance-revolution.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3282/turning-climate-risk-into-opportunity-dr-godefroy-grosjean-and-ena-derenoncourt-on-ethiopias-green-finance-revolution.html Wed, 24 Sep 2025 15:48:27 +0530 In this exclusive Agrospectrum interview, Dr. Godefroy Grosjean, Co-lead of CGIAR’s Hub for Sustainable Finance (ImpactSF), and Ena Derenoncourt, Senior Officer at the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT and ACT-H Project Lead, share how climate-aligned finance is reshaping Ethiopia’s agricultural landscape. They highlight  how the ACT-H initiative, backed by the Gates Foundation, is piloting bundled green loans that combine credit with irrigation, insurance, and training to de-risk horticulture value chains and empower smallholder farmers. Dr. Grosjean and Ena highlight the ImpactSF Analyzer, an AI-enabled tool translating climate data into actionable credit and portfolio metrics for banks, allowing them to move from single-loan transactions to systemic portfolio design. They have discussed the alignment of these efforts with Ethiopia’s ESG regulations, NAFIR 2025–2030, and ACC models, positioning horticulture as a catalytic entry point for climate-smart investment. Ultimately, they envision a financial ecosystem where capital flows to resilient, inclusive, and nature-positive food systems—turning climate risk into a driver of opportunity. Section I: Setting the Context – Vision and Urgency Ethiopia’s agriculture is both the backbone of the economy and deeply vulnerable to climate volatility. What motivated CGIAR’s ImpactSF to engage directly with the country’s financial institutions through ACT-H? Agriculture is vital to Ethiopia’s economy but highly climate-vulnerable. By embedding science-based KPIs and blended finance tools, ImpactSF helps banks design inclusive, climate-smart loans for small-scale producers and agri-SMEs—strengthening resilience and driving systemic change toward inclusive, nature-positive food, land, and water systems. The Government of Ethiopia has built a strong agricultural extension system, complemented by the Agricultural Transformation Institute’s (ATI) flagship initiative—the Agricultural Commercialization Clusters (ACC). The ACC model organizes priority commodities and value chain actors into clusters, creating a platform for targeted support and systemic change. Through the ACT-H initiative, supported by the Gates Foundation and in collaboration with ATI and Precise, ImpactSF is introducing green finance products to scale solar-powered irrigation for horticulture. Financing these crops through climate-informed financing, de-risking approaches, and market partnerships strengthen farmer resilience and fosters sustainable growth. In addition, building the capacity of financial institutions to design and deliver climate-linked and gender-sensitive financial products is critical. Tailored solutions ensure that women, youth, and vulnerable households are meaningfully included, reinforcing Ethiopia’s efforts toward inclusive and resilient agricultural transformation. The ACT-H initiative is framed around climate-smart horticulture. Why horticulture, and why now? What makes it a catalytic entry point for climate-aligned finance in Ethiopia? Horticulture is high-value, labor-intensive, and central to many farmer’s livelihoods. Yet it is highly exposed to drought and rainfall shifts, making deployment of climate finance urgent. The ACT-H initiative focuses on solar-powered irrigation and other climate-smart inputs, equipping farmers while catalyzing broader agri-food transformation. Horticulture—particularly banana and avocado within ACCs—offers a catalytic entry point for climate-aligned finance: Horticulture offers significant economic and livelihood benefits, contributing to household incomes, nutrition, and exports, with target crops that are bankable and enjoy strong market demand. However, these crops are highly vulnerable to climate shocks, and without appropriate risk instruments, households often face distress sales and defaults. By combining loans with insurance, climate-smart inputs, and digital repayment options, smallholder farmers—many of whom are too large for microfinance but perceived as too risky by commercial banks—become ideal candidates for innovative climate-aligned investment. Strategically, this approach aligns with national priorities such as NAFIR 2025–2030, the National Agricultural Insurance Strategy, and Digital Ethiopia 2025, while Agricultural Commercialization Clusters (ACCs) provide a scalable platform for implementation. By targeting horticulture now, ACT-H can demonstrate how climate-aligned finance can de-risk agriculture, attract private capital, and deliver measurable adaptation and livelihood outcomes—setting the stage for replication across other value chains. What unique role does CGIAR—through ImpactSF—play in bridging scientific insights with financial decision-making in such high-stakes, low-margin sectors like smallholder farming? ImpactSF leverages decades of CGIAR science and expertise into practical tools for lenders, with an emphasis on local relevance. Through the AI-informed ImpactSF Analyzer and robust KPI frameworks, we make climate risk visible and financeable. This bridges research with day-to-day lending realities, which is especially important for smallholders and women farmers, who often face significant barriers and challenges to accessing finance. At ImpactSF and within the CGIAR, our work with farmers and farmer organizations gives us key insights into what is needed to create change from the bottom up. Through this role, ImpactSF ensures that financial products are not only bankable but also aligned with climate adaptation, mitigation, and resilience priorities, while advancing gender equity, youth inclusion, and environmental sustainability. Its ability to translate rigorous scientific evidence into actionable financial structures makes it uniquely positioned to bridge the gap between global climate finance standards (e.g., GCF, IFC, TCFD/IFRS S2) and the practical realities of Ethiopia’s smallholder systems. Section II: Climate Risk, Lending Challenges & Opportunity Framing Many Ethiopian banks reportedly have the liquidity but not the risk frameworks for agriculture. How is the ImpactSF Analyzer helping change that equation? This is a common challenge, banks across regions have liquidity but lack climate risk frameworks, limiting agri-lending. The ImpactSF Analyzer helps bridge this gap by identifying climate-smart investment opportunities, ensuring funding goes where it is needed. By integrating  scientific, financial and climate data, the Analyzer gives banks the confidence to design viable products that align with farmers’ realities and climate risk. By integrating scientific, financial, and climate data, the ImpactSF Analyzer enables comprehensive climate-smart lending. It supports risk-adjusted product design by aligning loans with seasonal cash flows, climate hazards, and insurance needs. It facilitates capital mobilization by producing risk metrics that attract concessional guarantees or additional liquidity. At the same time, it builds market confidence by tracking loan repayments, insurance uptake, and adoption of climate-smart agriculture practices, making agricultural finance more investable and resilient. The Analyzer ensures systematic, scalable expansion of climate-smart lending across Ethiopia. Could you explain how the tool translates climate data—like rainfall variability or drought hazards—into actionable metrics for credit scoring or portfolio design? The Analyzer takes climate data such as rainfall variability, drought frequency, or heat stress and links it directly to agricultural productivity risk at the crop and location level. Using CGIAR science, AI models and remote sensing, it projects yield impacts over the next 2–3 seasons, while also factoring in farmers’ adaptive capacity (e.g. irrigation, crop diversification). This produces forward-looking risk scores that can be integrated into credit scoring models or portfolio stress tests. For a lender, this means being able to differentiate between clients exposed to high vs. moderate climate risk, adjust loan conditions accordingly, and support anticipating default probabilities. At the portfolio level, the metrics allow banks to design more resilient sector exposures, set concentration limits, and steer capital toward climate-smart practices. Section III: Product Innovation, Tools & Bundled Finance The concept of bundled green finance—credit paired with irrigation, insurance, and training—was a major workshop highlight. What makes this model so promising for both lenders and farmers? Bundled finance reduces risk for both farmers and lenders. Pairing credit with irrigation, insurance, and training ensures farmers can repay loans while banks protect their portfolios. It’s a win-win model for resilience and growth. How are tools like the ImpactSF Analyzer enabling Ethiopian banks to go from a single-loan mindset to systems thinking—where value chains, repayment behavior, and environmental triggers are all interconnected? The Analyzer helps banks see farming systems, not just single loans. It links climate triggers, and value chain dynamics. This shifts lenders toward systemic, climate-smart portfolio design. Section IV: Systems Change, Policy & Inclusion Ethiopia’s regulators are rolling out new ESG reporting requirements. How is ImpactSF helping financial institutions align with this regulatory shift while strengthening climate-smart investment pipelines? The ESG rules present both challenges and opportunities. ImpactSF helps banks comply while building climate-smart pipelines through: ImpactSF supports financial institutions through a combination of capacity building, tools, and pipeline strengthening. It trains banks, MFIs, and insurers to design green finance products, including bundled credit, insurance, and solar-powered irrigation solutions. The ImpactSF Analyzer provides the data and insights needed to meet new ESG reporting requirements while designing stronger, more credible green finance products. Additionally, by applying a value chain lens, ImpactSF helps target priority sectors such as horticulture and livestock, scaling climate-smart products while ensuring measurable outcomes in gender inclusion, resilience, and productivity. ImpactSF turns new reporting requirements into an opportunity: building bankable, climate-smart products that attract concessional capital, reduce risk, and deliver real impact for farmers. What’s CGIAR’s broader vision for inclusive agri-finance in Ethiopia? Are you working to influence national policy, support rural banks, or scale models across other value chains? We work with banks, policymakers, and partners to shape national models. The aim is scalable finance across value chains and regions. This aligns with the CGIAR’s broader work in the region with the Ministry of Agriculture, National and Regional Agricultural Research Institutes, Ethiopian universities and both international and national development partners. There are the greatest number of CGIAR projects, initiatives, and funding in the East and Southern Africa (ESA) region, so it is a key area of our work. Section V: Scaling Impact & the Path Forward What’s next for ImpactSF and ACT-H in Ethiopia? Are there plans to pilot bundled loan products with partner institutions or integrate Analyzer insights into real-time lending decisions? Next, Act-H will co-develop bundled green loan products with partner banks and pilot innovative financing solutions in high-priority value chains. Insights from the ImpactSF Analyzer will feed into real-time lending, helping institutions actively manage climate risks. These pilots will lay the foundation for scale. How will success be measured—by hectares transformed, emissions reduced, capital deployed, or increased farmer incomes? Or is it something more systemic? Success means systemic change: capital flowing, risks reduced, and farmers empowered. It will be measured in farmer incomes, women’s access to finance, hectares under irrigation, and resilient lending portfolios. Above all, success means driving transformation toward a climate-smart financial ecosystem—one that helps turn Ethiopia’s climate challenges into investment opportunities. --- Suchetana Choudhury (suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3263/billion-dollar-microbe-market-transforming-global-vegetable-supply-chains.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3263/billion-dollar-microbe-market-transforming-global-vegetable-supply-chains.html Wed, 17 Sep 2025 11:27:31 +0530 For over fifty years, synthetic fertilisers powered global food production but caused soil degradation, water contamination, and greenhouse-gas emissions, prompting a shift toward sustainable alternatives. Biofertilisers—live microbial products—are emerging as a mainstream solution, improving nutrient uptake, plant resilience, and produce quality while integrating with precision agriculture systems. Policy support, particularly in India, the EU, and Denmark, is accelerating adoption through subsidies, regulatory compliance, and carbon-credit incentives. Regional case studies demonstrate that microbial inputs, when combined with sensor-guided fertigation and AI-driven management, can reduce synthetic nitrogen use by 15–35 per cent , boost yields, and enhance market value. The global takeaway: biofertilisers are not just environmentally necessary but a strategic enabler of profitable, precision-driven vegetable farming. For decades, synthetic nitrogen and phosphate fertilisers were the workhorses of the Green Revolution — turbocharging yields, slashing food prices, and feeding billions. But that victory came with a steep bill: degraded soils, polluted water, rising greenhouse gases, and dependence on inputs whose prices swing with global markets. The rules of fertilisation are now being rewritten. In high-value vegetable farming, the shift is unmistakable. Sustainability mandates, precision agtech, and microbial breakthroughs are pushing growers toward a new playbook. Biofertilisers — living microbes that boost nutrient uptake, soil health, and crop resilience — are stepping out of the margins and into the heart of production. They don’t just cut the fertiliser bill; they raise produce quality, strengthen plants against stress, and slot neatly into sensor-driven, fertigation-ready systems from India to Denmark. The question is no longer if they work — but how fast they can scale and reshape the economics of vegetable farming. From Idea to Instrument: The Biofertiliser Opportunity The science behind biofertilisers is solid. Symbiotic bacteria like Rhizobium, phosphate-solubilising microbes, and mycorrhizal fungi unlock bound nutrients, fix atmospheric nitrogen, and boost water-use efficiency. Meta-analyses show that, under proper management, biofertilisers can replace 20–30 per cent of synthetic N/P in vegetables without sacrificing yield — while improving firmness, vitamin levels, and shelf life. The market is catching up fast. IMARC Group projects the global biofertiliser sector to hit $2.5 billion in 2024, growing at over 11 per cent CAGR through 2030 — faster than most ag inputs. In high-value vegetable farming, where residue limits and sustainability standards are strict, adoption already tops 20 per cent. But scaling isn’t frictionless. Microbes are living products — they need cold chains, soil-specific tailoring, and precise timing. Farmers used to the consistency of synthetics can face uneven results if biofertilisers meet the wrong soil pH, moisture, or temperature. Policy Landscape: Aligning Incentives, Compliance, and Adoption Government policy is now the biggest accelerator — or brake — on biofertiliser adoption. In India, programmes like PKVY and NMSA are subsidising bio-inputs, funding farmer training, and running demo plots to de-risk adoption for both smallholders and commercial hubs. Fertiliser control rules and mandatory nutrient-use efficiency reporting are nudging growers toward balanced nutrition. States such as Maharashtra, Gujarat, and Tamil Nadu add extra firepower with cold-chain support, certification, and advisory services — lowering the operational barriers to microbial use. ” With over a century of microbial expertise, now renewed by the merger of Novozymes and Christian Hansen, we are working to redefine how crops are nourished, protected and optimized. We work not only to replace chemical inputs, but also harness nature’s own solutions for improved and more resilient cropping systems, all while allowing growers to unlock additional yields from every acre. Our philosophy has always been to integrate our global R&D expertise with local needs. We see this in action in different ways. At the business level, as a deeply innovation driven company, we invest roughly 10 per cent of our turnover in R&D, a very significant proportion of our revenue ” — Kate Brandon Sutton, Head of Plant Biosolutions Applied R&D, Novonesis Precision agriculture is the force multiplier. Sensor-guided fertigation, drones, and AI agronomy platforms sync microbial application with crop growth stages, maximising yield response. But, as Katie Whittiker of Novonesis points out, India’s smallholder-heavy farm structure makes scaling a challenge. Subscription-based digital agronomy and shared drone services are emerging as cost-efficient solutions to bridge the gap. “Protected cultivation adds another layer of opportunity, particularly around urban consumption centres where quality, consistency, and residue compliance are non-negotiable. Here, biofertilisers and biostimulants can be precisely delivered through drip systems, aligning with the closed-loop, resource-efficient nature of greenhouses and shade-net operations”, opined Kattie. “Companies like Novonesis, which collaborate with cooperatives and input distributors, play a crucial role in bridging research-led innovation with last-mile farmer adoption — ensuring that advanced microbial solutions reach growers with proper guidance and compliance support “, she added. “Our long term partnerships with platforms like Benchling underscores our investment in cutting-edge R&D innovation and development of next-gen Biosolutions for emerging agricultural segments. We aim to do this in precision farming and protected agriculture segments by – Expanding the suite of microbe-based inputs tailored for high-value crops; Collaborating with organizations and cooperatives to enable data-driven decision making at the level of the farm and the field, and Supporting growers with robust stewardship programs that facilitate seamless adoption, and help maximize returns on investment " — Katie Whittiker, Head of Plant BioYield Business Unit, Novonesis Globally, regulation is uneven but decisive. The EU’s Fertilising Products Regulation (FPR 2019/1009) sets strict efficacy, safety, and traceability standards — critical for exporters facing tight nitrate and residue limits. In the Middle East and Africa, policy levers are tied to EU compliance: Turkey, Morocco, and Egypt are rapidly adopting microbial fertilisers to secure greenhouse exports, while Sub-Saharan rules remain patchy — a hurdle and opportunity for new entrants. Denmark offers a glimpse of the future: subsidies tied to nitrogen cuts, public-private R&D under the IBIS platform, and carbon-credit monetisation create a strong business case for biofertiliser use. Policy isn’t just compliance — it rewires market economics. Where governments integrate incentives, adoption rises faster, microbial performance is more consistent, and ROI for suppliers and growers improves. Precision Vegetable Farming Meets Biological Inputs Digital agriculture and microbial biosolutions are redefining performance standards in high-value vegetable farming. In both CEA and irrigated fields, blanket fertiliser applications are giving way to real-time, demand-driven nutrition. IoT soil sensors, AI-powered fertigation, and multispectral imaging now work in sync to deliver the right nutrients at the right moment — maximising efficiency and yield. ” Extensive global and regional trials on vegetable crops — including tomatoes, chilies, and leafy greens — consistently reveal that India’s average yields remain well below global benchmarks. This productivity gap underscores a significant opportunity for bio-inputs such as biofertilisers and biostimulants to drive both yield gains and sustainability outcomes. When integrated with optimised agronomic practices, biological solutions have delivered yield improvements exceeding 10 per cent compared with conventional methods. In India, fertigation-based trials have recorded yield increases of up to 18 per cent in tomatoes and chilies, while greenhouse experiments in Vietnam have demonstrated markedly improved nutrient uptake and superior quality in leafy vegetables. Validated through close collaboration with growers and research institutions, these results confirm the reliability of microbial inputs under real-world conditions " — Shanmugam Sambanthan, Commercial Head, Agriculture ,South Asia, Middle East and Africa, Novonesis Globally, the impact is striking. Israeli drip-irrigation pioneers like Netafim and Rivulis inject biofertilisers directly into root zones, boosting microbial colonisation and cutting synthetic nitrogen use 20–30 per cent without hurting yields. In Europe, greenhouse tomato growers combine microbial consortia with precision nutrients to hit nitrate-residue targets while sustaining export-grade productivity. A 2023 Wageningen study found 12–15 per cent yield gains and up to 40 per cent nitrate reductions when biofertilisers were paired with variable-rate fertigation. India is steadily moving toward this model, though adoption is concentrated in progressive clusters. Agritech start-ups are embedding microbial inputs into AI-driven agronomy platforms, giving smallholders access to tools once reserved for corporates. Subscription services for drones, sensors, and fertigation-as-a-service are lowering financial barriers. Early pilots in Nashik report tomato yield gains of 10–18 per cent and synthetic nitrogen savings of up to 35 kg/ha through precision-linked biofertilisers. Protected cultivation is another growth lever. Greenhouses and shade-net houses near urban centres enable year-round, residue-free, premium vegetables with lower post-harvest losses. Novonesis’ biofertiliser and biostimulant range, tailored for drip-irrigated systems, has delivered firmer bell peppers and cucumbers, higher marketable yields, and 12–15 per cent better nutrient-use efficiency, boosting grower margins. The benefits are clear: lower synthetic fertiliser costs, improved water efficiency, and premiums for low-residue produce. But scaling is local — what works for a protected cucumber farm in Bengaluru may not suit an open-field tomato grower in Rajasthan. Precision tools plus biological inputs aren’t just incremental; they mark a structural shift toward climate-resilient, resource-efficient farming. For policymakers, they advance fertiliser-reduction and soil-health goals. For growers, they boost per-hectare profitability while cutting input volatility. For investors, they signal a decade of data-driven, biology-led, sustainability-aligned growth. Across the globe, this integration is gaining traction. Israeli drip-irrigation firms inject biofertilisers into root zones to optimise colonisation. European greenhouse tomato growers pair microbial consortia with precision nutrients to meet yield and nitrate-residue standards. In India, agritech start-ups are embedding microbial inputs into AI-powered agronomy platforms, bringing precision farming to smallholders. Benchmarking Regional Pathways: India in Focus Biofertiliser adoption is global but uneven, following three distinct paths: scale-driven South Asia, scarcity-driven Middle East and Africa, and regulation-led Denmark. Each reflects unique market forces, infrastructure readiness, and regulatory pressures, offering lessons on where the microbial transition will accelerate and how businesses can position themselves. India leads South Asia, accounting for over 60 per cent of the region’s $143 million biofertiliser market in 2024, with 11–12 per cent annual growth projected. Policy is a major driver: PKVY and NMSA subsidise bio-inputs, fund training and demo plots, and incentivise adoption among smallholders and commercial vegetable hubs. Fertiliser controls and nutrient-use reporting further nudge farmers toward microbial solutions, especially where synthetic fertiliser costs are volatile. Domestic production adds a cost edge. Local Rhizobium, phosphate-solubilising microbes, and mycorrhizal inoculants are often 20–30 per cent cheaper than imports, while improved quality control builds trust. Smallholder economics are increasingly compelling: ICAR trials show integrated biofertiliser regimes in tomatoes, brinjal, and capsicum can boost yields 10–18 per cent, improve nutrient-use efficiency up to 25 per cent, and cut synthetic nitrogen by 35 kg/ha under fertigation. These results are reshaping the investment calculus for farmers, distributors, and downstream buyers alike. Shanmugam Sambanthan, Commercial Head, Agriculture ,South Asia, Middle East and Africa, Novonesis, expects India’s B2B bio-input market to evolve rapidly, though the highly fragmented agriculture landscape . ” Currently, bio-inputs are still a small fraction of overall inputs used by farmers. The fragmentation across farmlands provides can be a significant challenges to the adoption of Bio-inputs, particularly when it comes to reaching farmers through the direct trade, and most importantly in providing meaningful services to farmers. Along similar lines, companies including startups in the bio-input space struggle to scale due to the high investment and resource requirements needed for wide market reach “, Sambanthan opined. Novonesis has carved a distinct niche in India’s bio-inputs market as a B2B innovator, focusing on cutting-edge R&D rather than direct-to-farmer sales. Its strength lies in developing advanced microbial and biostimulant solutions while partners handle market reach, distribution, and farmer engagement — a win–win that accelerates adoption without diluting focus on innovation, quality, or regulatory compliance. A collaboration with KRIBHCO illustrates this model. By combining Novonesis’ next-generation biosolutions with KRIBHCO’s distribution network and agricultural expertise, the partnership scales access, ensures reliable supply, and co-invests in farmer awareness programs and demonstration plots across diverse crops and agro-climatic zones. The results are tangible: Irrigated vegetable hubs like Nashik (Maharashtra) and Kolar (Karnataka) report 30–40 per cent integration for high-value crops such as tomato and capsicum. Adoption lags in rainfed eastern and central regions ( ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3048/the-great-agri-reset-climate-smart-tech-driven-farmer-first.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3048/the-great-agri-reset-climate-smart-tech-driven-farmer-first.html Wed, 25 Jun 2025 11:05:31 +0530 India’s farmlands are undergoing a quiet revolution—powered by tech, backed by policy, and driven by purpose. With agriculture employing 45 per cent of the workforce and contributing 18 per cent to GDP, the rise of agritech could unlock a $95 billion GDP boost through smarter yields, lower costs, and climate resilience. From drone-powered soil checks to AI-driven advisories, platforms like AgriStack and eNAM are turning farming into a precision, data-led industry. Over $2.6 billion in startup funding since FY22 signals that agritech isn’t just innovation—it’s India’s next growth engine. With the right investments and inclusive digital tools, India can lead the world in climate-smart, tech-forward farming. India’s rich agro-ecological diversity has long established it as a global agricultural leader. Agriculture continues to be a vital pillar of the Indian economy, contributing nearly 18 per cent to GDP and employing about 45 per cent of the country’s workforce, according to Redseer Strategy Consultants. Even during the upheaval of the COVID-19 pandemic, agriculture stood out as a pillar of stability and resilience. This was largely enabled by targeted government interventions, including strong support for farmer producer organisations (FPOs), promotion of crop diversification, improvements in agricultural productivity, encouragement of mechanisation, and enhanced financial support mechanisms. A key milestone in this effort was the launch of the Rs 1 lakh crore Agriculture Infrastructure Fund, designed to strengthen rural infrastructure, improve post-harvest logistics, and build a more resilient agri-economy. Despite its agricultural output, India ranks only eighth globally in agricultural exports, holding a 2.33 per cent share of the global market. However, with the rise of agritech innovations, the sector is on the brink of a major shift.  A recent Ernst & Young report estimates that India’s agritech market holds a $24 billion opportunity, yet current penetration remains low at just 1.5 per cent. If fully developed, the agritech ecosystem could increase farmers’ incomes by 25 per cent to 35 per cent, contributing up to $95 billion to GDP through enhanced productivity, reduced input costs, improved market access, and diversified income streams. In response, the integration of climate-resilient practices with agricultural innovation has emerged as a critical strategy to safeguard both food and energy security. India’s agricultural future hinges on its ability to adapt and innovate. By merging traditional knowledge with cutting-edge technologies and fostering an ecosystem that supports resilience, India can not only protect its farmers but also lead the way in sustainable, climate-smart agriculture. With the right investments and policies, the country can build a farming system that is productive, equitable, and climate-ready, securing food and fuel for generations to come. India’s agritech sector is undergoing a seismic shift. Powered by digital innovation and growing investor interest, it’s reshaping the future of farming—from the ground up. Since FY22, the sector has pulled in over $2.6 billion across 340 deals, with nearly 70 per cent of funding flowing into B2B/B2C market linkages and full-stack platforms. The message from investors is clear: Agritech is no longer a niche—it’s a commercial opportunity with national impact. India is making significant strides in reshaping its agricultural landscape by integrating digital innovation and sustainability into the heart of farming. Initiatives like the Digital Agriculture Mission, with an allocation of Rs 2817 crore, are equipping farmers with real-time data and decision-making tools that improve productivity and resource efficiency. The Centre has allocated Rs 1,261 crore for the Namo Drone Didi scheme for 2023-26, bringing a much-needed gender lens to agriculture by empowering women through self-help groups, turning them into active participants and entrepreneurs in the supply chain. The National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) further strengthens the ecosystem by promoting environmentally friendly farming practices. To bolster domestic manufacturing of drones and related components, the government is planning the PLI Scheme 2.0 worth Rs 1000 crore. Together, these initiatives are laying the foundation for a more resilient and inclusive agricultural sector—one that is better equipped to tackle both current pressures and future demands. Centralised digital platforms can help streamline stakeholder coordination and enhance service delivery. At the same time, innovative financing models, such as micro-credit schemes and blended finance, are essential to unlock investments in agri-tech solutions. Just as crucial is the need for training and capacity building, ensuring that farmers not only have access to technology but also the confidence and skills to use it effectively. Agri-tech holds the key to revitalising Indian agriculture, offering solutions that increase yields, reduce environmental impact, and improve livelihoods, especially in the face of mounting climate risks. By embracing innovation at scale, India can make meaningful progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and its national commitments under global climate agreements. With the right vision and collective effort, India can not only transform its agricultural sector but also emerge as a global leader in climate-smart farming, demonstrating how technology and inclusive growth can shape a sustainable future. Where Technology Meets the TillerA quiet revolution is reshaping India’s farmlands — and technology is leading the charge. Across the country, agritech startups are blooming, tackling age-old farming challenges with modern solutions. Driving this growth is strong government support. Initiatives like Startup India have created a fertile environment for innovation, giving entrepreneurs the tools and confidence to break new ground in the agritech space. Agritech is doing more than just streamlining farm operations — it's reshaping the entire agricultural value chain. By harnessing tools like AI, machine learning, data analytics, and SaaS platforms, farmers are making better decisions faster. These technologies enable smarter resource use, reduce operational costs, and help maximise yields — all while preparing farms to withstand climate challenges. In short, agritech is turning agriculture into a data-driven, climate-smart industry — and the benefits are just beginning to unfold. Private equity and venture capital firms are pouring capital into the sector, providing startups with the resources they need to refine their operations, boost research and development, and expand into new markets. The outcome: A fresh wave of tech-powered agriculture that’s smarter, more sustainable, and perfectly tuned to the needs of today’s farmers. Policy Meets Precision: India’s AgriTech LeapThe fusion of technology and agriculture is opening up powerful new pathways to tackle the growing risks posed by climate change. In India, the government is playing a proactive role in driving this transformation. A cornerstone of this effort is the Agri-Stack — a digital infrastructure designed to unify agricultural services and data on a single platform. This initiative makes it easier for farmers to access everything from advisories and subsidies to credit and insurance, while also streamlining coordination across the entire agricultural value chain. By improving access to cutting-edge technologies and offering financial and policy support, India is steadily building an agri-tech ecosystem that empowers farmers to boost productivity while embracing sustainable practices. Among the most impactful steps taken by the Indian government to modernise agriculture are initiatives like the Agricultural Accelerator Fund and the creation of Digital Public Infrastructure for Agriculture. These forward-looking programmes are designed to energise India’s fast-growing AgriTech ecosystem and promote innovation that can withstand future disruptions and challenges. Among the most groundbreaking initiatives by the Indian government in recent years is AgriStack, formally called the India Digital Ecosystem of Agriculture (IDEA). This bold vision seeks to weave together the country’s vast agricultural data into a single, powerful platform, anchored by each farmer’s land records. In a nation where most farmers cultivate small plots with limited resources and little exposure to cutting-edge technology, AgriStack holds the promise of being a true game-changer. This ecosystem integrates an impressive array of digital innovations, transforming the way decisions are made on the ground:First, Drone-powered soil and crop assessments that provide precise insights to optimise pesticide use and promote eco-friendly farming. Second, tailored recommendations crafted for every unique plot of land—offering advice on the best seeds to sow, optimal farming techniques, and smart soil management practicesThird, Instant, real-time updates on weather, crop insurance options, market trends, and government programs, all designed to reduce risks and improve farmers’ livelihoods. By delivering these actionable insights straight to farmers’ fingertips, AgriStack has the potential to revolutionise agriculture across India, empowering millions to make informed, timely decisions that enhance both productivity and resilience. A key pillar of India’s AgriTech transformation is the National Agriculture Market (eNAM)—a comprehensive electronic trading platform that seamlessly integrates existing Agriculture Produce Market Committee (APMC) mandis across the country. By bridging the information gap between buyers and sellers, eNAM introduces much-needed transparency and efficiency into agricultural markets. This digital marketplace unifies national trade, enabling farmers to access fair prices in real time based on actual supply and demand. The outcome? Farmers gain stronger bargaining power, markets operate more smoothly, and consumers benefit from access to high-quality produce. In the 2022-23 Union Budget, the government launched the Agriculture Accelerator Fund, a visionary initiative aimed at energising rural entrepreneurs and startups driving innovation in agriculture. This fund supports the development of affordable, technology-based solutions tailored to overcome persistent challenges faced by farmers. By empowering young “Agri-preneurs” with funding and resources, the initiative is poised to boost productivity and foster a dynamic AgriTech ecosystem nationwide. Supporting these efforts is the plan to establish a Digital Public Infrastructure for Agriculture—an open-source, interoperable platform designed around six farmer-focused services. These services include crop planning, health management, easier access to inputs, credit and insurance support, market insights, and the promotion of AgriTech startups. A shining example of this vision is the government’s Digital Soil Health Card initiative. By analysing soil quality and composition, the programme promotes precision farming tailored to local conditions. The revamped Soil Health Card portal, accessible via web and mobile app, provides farmers with easy-to-understand reports—complete with emoticons indicating soil health—in 22 languages and five dialects, ensuring broad accessibility and inclusivity. At the same time, the government is turbocharging India’s AgriTech scene by actively backing agri-incubators and start-ups. Programmes like RKVY-RAFTAR and the Agri-Sure Fund are providing crucial funding, expert guidance, and resources to nurture promising early-stage ventures and build a thriving innovation ecosystem. This support is fuelling breakthroughs in precision farming and cutting-edge technologies that boost both productivity and climate resilience. Initiatives such as the Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchai Yojana are pushing efficient irrigation solutions to conserve water, while the use of drones and other smart tools highlights a bold commitment to sustainable, resource-savvy agriculture. Together, these efforts are reshaping Indian farming—making it smarter, greener, and ready to face the challenges of tomorrow. Invest Integrate Innovate To effectively drive agri-tech integration, several strategic actions are essential. First, modernising agri-incubators is crucial. This involves updating their infrastructure and programmes to align with rapidly evolving technologies and changing market demands. Second, establishing state-level, controlled testing grounds where innovators can pilot their technologies in real-world agricultural environments is necessary. These testing sites enable developers to rigorously evaluate the effectiveness and practicality of their solutions while ensuring compliance with regulatory standards. Third, the development of an integrated digital platform is key to creating a cohesive agri-tech ecosystem. For farmers, it would offer easy access to timely advisories, best practices for sustainable farming, and direct links to market opportunities, empowering them to make data-driven decisions that improve productivity and income. Fourth, significant investment must be channelled into precision farming and climate-smart technologies. These advanced tools and methods enhance farmers’ ability to respond to environmental challenges such as erratic weather, water scarcity, and soil degradation. Finally, deploying a diverse range of financial instruments is vital to accelerate the growth and adoption of promising agri-tech ventures. This includes fast-track credit facilities to provide startups with quick access to capital, risk-sharing frameworks that encourage investment by mitigating potential losses, and impact investments focused on generating social and environmental benefits alongside financial returns.By implementing these comprehensive measures, the integration of agri-tech can be significantly accelerated, fostering a more sustainable, productive, and resilient agricultural sector that benefits all stakeholders involved. India stands at the threshold of a new agricultural era—one where sustainable growth and climate resilience go hand in hand. By embracing agri-tech innovations, the country can make significant strides toward achieving global environmental goals, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and safeguarding farmers from climate uncertainties. ------- Suchetana Choudhury ( suchetana.choudhuri@agrospectrumindia.com ) ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3045/indias-agrochemical-exports-expected-to-be-moderate-rebound-in-fy25-rubix-report.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/3045/indias-agrochemical-exports-expected-to-be-moderate-rebound-in-fy25-rubix-report.html Tue, 24 Jun 2025 15:56:39 +0530 The report highlights herbicides as the fastest-growing segment, driven by cost-effective manufacturing. Key markets include the US and Brazil, with Japan emerging as the second-largest destination for herbicides.  After steadily rising from FY2020 to FY2023, India’s agrochemical exports experienced a sharp year-on-year decline of nearly 22 per cent in FY2024 due to global destocking and pricing pressures. However, a moderate rebound is expected in FY2025, with improving demand and inventory normalisation, according to latest Rubix report.  The US and Brazil retained their spots as the top two export destinations for Indian insecticides and fungicides over the past five years. However, in FY2025, Japan displaced Brazil as the second-largest export destination for herbicides. Cross-Border Trade Dynamics  Exports are navigating headwinds but are expected to recover India’s agrochemical exports declined sharply in FY2024, by nearly 22 per cent compared to the previous year, primarily due to global inventory destocking, heightened price competition from China, and subdued demand in key export markets. Distributors worldwide reduced procurement to manage excess stock amid falling prices, while Chinese suppliers re-entered the market with aggressively priced products, making Indian exports less competitive. Additionally, erratic weather patterns impacted agricultural activity in importing countries, further dampening demand. However, exports are expected to recover in the coming years as global inventories stabilise, demand picks up with improved agricultural cycles, and Indian manufacturers adapt with cost-efficient production and diversified portfolios. As a result, the trade surplus (difference between exports and imports) came down from USD 3.6 billion in FY2023 and USD 2.8 billion in FY2024 to USD 2.3 billion in FY2025 (April 2024 February 2025). Importance of Herbicides in Exports  Herbicides have emerged as the leading export segment, experiencing the fastest growth at 20 per cent CAGR from FY2020 to FY2025. The share of herbicides in total agrochemical exports increased from 31% to 37 per cent during the same timeframe. This growth is driven by India’s cost-effective manufacturing, the rising global demand for affordable herbicides, and the increasing scarcity and cost of agricultural labour, making herbicide-based weed control a more viable choice for farmers. Concentration in Key Markets  The export landscape reveals a growing concentration in key markets, as the top five export destinations account for more than 50 per cent share for insecticides and fungicides and nearly 71 per cent for herbicides. Notably, the US and Brazil have maintained their positions as the top export destinations for insecticides and fungicides over the past five years. However, in FY2025, Japan displaced Brazil as the second-largest export destination for herbicides ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/2647/how-data-analytics-is-reshaping-decision-making-for-agribusiness.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/2647/how-data-analytics-is-reshaping-decision-making-for-agribusiness.html Mon, 23 Dec 2024 20:07:39 +0530 By Mr. Sanjay Borkar, Co-Founder and CEO - FarmERP Data analytics is transforming decision-making across agribusinesses by shifting the focus from traditional farming practices to technology-driven, precision approaches. In the face of growing challenges like climate change, resource scarcity, and fluctuating market demands, data analytics is enabling agribusinesses to boost productivity, improve profitability, and enhance predictability. Research shows that the application of data analytics in agriculture can increase productivity by up to 20% and reduce costs by 10-15%, making it a key driver of industry growth. A significant area where data analytics is making a difference is crop management. By leveraging technologies such as satellite imagery, IoT sensors, and predictive models, farmers can monitor factors like soil health, crop conditions, and weather patterns in real time. This allows for more precise farming practices—farmers can adjust irrigation and fertilization schedules based on the unique needs of their crops, helping to reduce waste and improve yields. Predictive tools also make it easier to spot potential pest and disease outbreaks early, enabling timely interventions that minimize crop losses. Agribusinesses, especially those dealing with perishable products, face complex supply chain challenges. Here, data analytics plays a crucial role by providing insights into demand forecasting, inventory management, and logistics. By analyzing market trends, consumer behaviour, and seasonal patterns, businesses can more accurately predict demand and reduce waste. This helps to improve profitability and ensure fresh produce reaches markets faster. Advanced algorithms also optimize transportation routes and schedules, further improving efficiency. Market fluctuations and unpredictable demand are ongoing hurdles in the agribusiness world. Data analytics platforms that integrate financial data, trade patterns, and market conditions allow businesses to make more informed decisions about pricing and trading. These platforms also use predictive analytics to foresee market disruptions, such as supply shortages or policy changes, allowing businesses to implement proactive measures and mitigate potential risks. Sustainability is increasingly important in today’s agribusiness landscape, and data analytics is a powerful tool in achieving sustainability goals. By tracking water usage, energy consumption, and carbon footprints, businesses can align their operations with eco-friendly practices. In water-scarce areas, for example, data-driven insights can pinpoint regions where resources are being overutilized, helping businesses adopt conservation strategies to ensure long-term sustainability. Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are increasingly integrated into agribusiness data analytics, allowing businesses to analyze vast amounts of data and uncover insights that would be difficult for humans to identify. For example, AI tools can offer personalized crop rotation advice or pinpoint the best planting times. As machine learning algorithms evolve, they continually improve in accuracy, providing agribusinesses with ever-refined insights. Despite the significant benefits of data analytics, agribusinesses still face challenges, such as high implementation costs, a shortage of technical expertise, and data privacy concerns. Additionally, inconsistent data quality can sometimes lead to inaccurate insights. However, these challenges present opportunities for innovation, as businesses explore new ways to overcome them. As technology continues to evolve, data analytics will remain a powerful force in reshaping the future of agriculture, driving greater efficiency, sustainability, and profitability. The future of data-driven agribusiness looks promising, and with growing investments in these technologies, the sector is poised for further advancements.  ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1815/regenerative-food-systems-should-work-in-unison-with-healthcare-to-unlock-funding-potentials.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1815/regenerative-food-systems-should-work-in-unison-with-healthcare-to-unlock-funding-potentials.html Fri, 09 Feb 2024 10:04:50 +0530 "New business value, research finds $4.5 trillion per year could be unlocked during a regenerative transformation" Kearney Report Global management consultancy Kearney releases a new report revealing how food and healthcare systems can and should work in unison to unlock funding to create a healthy food future. The report, Food for thought: financing the food system transition, highlights the link between how we produce and process our food, and the health of our planet and its eight billion inhabitants. Compounding crises: ecosystem and human sicknessKearney highlights the urgency of our current compounding crises. Unhealthy foods drive chronicillnesses, and ecological degradation (soil, air, and water) drives further malnutrition and hunger. The four leading causes of death are directly linked to diet: stroke, diabetes, cancer, andcardiovascular disease. We produce enough calories to feed everyone on Earth, but 350 million people still experienceacute levels of food insecurity. Transition costs are high, but the cost of inaction is much higher. The report defines regenerative food systems as outcome-focused, healthy, inclusive, and adapted to local community and crop needs. A regenerative food system can help restore degraded ecosystems; reduce greenhouse gases and sequester carbon; and keep soil healthy, water clean, and foster biodiversity. A regenerative approach also encourages good human health, from the chemicals used to the ingredient choices made by food manufacturers. The report finds that while the transition costs toward a regenerative food system are high, the cost of inaction is even higher and includes. $4.3 trillion in health and obesity costs $16.3 trillion in hidden environmental and socioeconomic losses $3 trillion in economic losses from 4.2 billion people affected by climate disasters since 2000 Playing past a stalemateThe report advocates for transformative initiatives at scale, moving beyond the current financing stalemate. According to Kearney’s expert interviewees, most stakeholders are waiting for someone else to take the lead. Often, they are not acting at scale because of limited, short-term incentive structures. Furthermore, investment capital is unequally distributed. The report explores how large food, beverage, and agriculture companies can use their influence across the value chain and their financial wherewithal to encourage transformation. They also have a lot to gain, including capitalizing on Kearney Consumer Institute research showing the value of joint health–sustainability products and brands. Companies can also secure supply chains that are poorly prepared for a climate-changed world. Looking at new business value, research finds $4.5 trillion per year could be unlocked during a regenerative transformation. Meanwhile, healthcare agencies, providers, insurers, and government agencies can scale successful “food as medicine” initiatives while, at the same time, driving market demand and premiums for healthy, regenerative food. Research in the report shows billions in savings if these programs are scaled to national levels. Rhiannon Thomas, global lead, consumer and retail at Kearney, comments, “Food and health systems are inexorably linked. Today, too many of the dynamics between these systems incentivize poor human and ecosystem health, costing the public and private sectors trillions in hidden costs. While a scaled transformation to a healthy, regenerative food system is costly, the costs of inaction are higher. By working across intertwined systems, we can overcome the functional stalemate in funding to deliver on a 21st-century food system mission: feeding the world by regenerating human and ecosystem health.” Angela Hultberg, global sustainability director at Kearney, comments, “Too often, we frame global challenges as technology innovation gaps, and spend huge money, time, and energy investing in technology solutions for short-term symptoms without addressing root causes. Instead, we must innovate incentives, technologies, business models, and policies that embrace our fundamental dependence on natural ecosystems—soil, water, microbes, climate—all of which can be supported by a regenerative food system.” ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1791/china-is-sowing-export-agriculture-in-africa.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1791/china-is-sowing-export-agriculture-in-africa.html Mon, 05 Feb 2024 11:02:23 +0530 The China-Africa Economic and Trade recorded $400 million in trade for the first year and aims for $14 billion in trade with Africa by 2025 Over the past decade, China has made a major departure from its traditional model of China-Africa cooperation in the roll out of its BRI agriculture projects in Africa. Previously, China-Africa cooperation was mainly about sharing knowledge, and it did it through showcasing technology and providing aid for the construction of public works (like irrigation schemes) promoting agriculture for food. The BRI approach, however, referred to as "agriculture for profit", has operated through massive private or state-owned companies and has coupled the financing of transportation infrastructure projects (like rail and ports) with projects to industrialise African agriculture through hybrid seeds, machinery, logistics, food storage and processing facilities provided by Chinese companies. In 2021, a China-Africa Economic and Trade “Deep Collaboration Zone” was set up in Hunan province that contains a processing and trade centre for African agro-products. The centre recorded $400 million in trade for the first year and aims for $14 billion in trade with Africa by 2025. China’s confidence in its practices of fast economic growth attempts to present a template for African countries to follow under the BRI. Through its massive communication network, the BRI is promoting agriculture capitalisation as a successful means to eradicate poverty. China's agricultural intentions in Africa are mainly concerned with its soaring domestic meat consumption and support of its factory farming of poultry and pigs, which has created a huge demand for imported soybeans and maize for animal feed. The US and Brazil have long been China's dominant suppliers of soybeans and maize, but, with growing tensions with the US and other volatilities in production and trade such as Covid and climate change-induced droughts, the government is looking to diversify its supply sources. Over the past decade and a half, there have been numerous attempts by Chinese agribusinesses to invest in large-scale farming projects in Africa. However, these have not resulted in a significant amount of exports to China, and many of the projects have failed to even get off the ground. Nevertheless, at the China-Africa Leaders’ Roundtable Dialogue in Johannesburg in August 2023, President Xi Jinping emphasised that China would continue to try and develop large-scale crop farming on the continent. He also stressed that importance would be given to build up seed production capacity and seed markets for its corporations. China's largest seed company, Yuan Longping High-Tech Agriculture, a subsidiary of the state-owned conglomerate CITIC, has been tasked with leading this effort in Africa. In Tanzania, the company is pursuing a major effort to develop soybean production for export. In 2022, the Tanzanian government provided it with 53,000 hectares for a large-scale farming operation in the Chunya District of the Mbeya Region and in 2023 it fast-tracked the approval of the company's seed varieties. In preparation, Beijing's cleared several companies for the export of soybeans from Tanzania, and a first shipment was carried out by the giant state grain trader and food company, COFCO, which plays a central role in the BRI's food and agriculture projects around the world. Both Longping High-Tech and COFCO are also actively developing exports of soybeans in the West African country of Benin, which along with Tanzania and Ethiopia, was recently singled out by China for the development of soybean exports. China and Benin signed a protocol on the export of soybeans in September 2019 and, by 2022, Benin's annual exports to China exceeded 210,000 tonnes, accounting for over 60 per cent of its total soybean exports. The exports are mainly handled by COFCO's local subsidiary, Chinatex. Benin is also a target for maize exports. While maize is a staple food in Benin and is grown widely across the country, it is almost entirely consumed locally. Longping High-tech is trying to change this and develop a surplus for export through a programme supported by China's Ministry of Commerce, that is training farmers in growing its high-yield hybrid maize varieties, and then distributing them to other farmers for widespread cultivation. Other crops for export to China, beyond maize and soybeans, are also being supported in Africa through the BRI. China has recently put in place new sanitary and phytosanitary mechanisms to streamline the cross-border flow of agricultural products and increase the range of products covered under food safety regulations-- from seafood to avocados to cotton. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1788/new-emissions-standards-for-agri-businesses-hold-promise-to-transform-food-supply-chains.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1788/new-emissions-standards-for-agri-businesses-hold-promise-to-transform-food-supply-chains.html Fri, 02 Feb 2024 10:04:51 +0530 "Opportunity for forestry, land and agriculture sectors to reduce emissions and align foodsystems with science-based targets" explains Lia Nicholson - Head of Sustainability, Terrascope The 2024 UN climate conference, COP28 in Dubai, saw a flurry of agri-food pledges. In terms of policies, over 150 governments will include agriculture and food in the next round of their national climate plans, due 2025, per the UAE Declaration on Agriculture, Food and Climate. Carbon accounting standards may not be an obvious climate hero. Yet two recent developments hold the potential to transform the global food industry by funnelling money towards decarbonisation within the supply chain, known as Scope 3 emissions. The global agri-food supply chain is dominated by smallholder farmers in emerging markets, who face vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in production and distribution and need support to transition to net zero. How can agri-food supply chain tackle the vulnerabilities of On-farm greenhouse gas emissions, especialy smallholder ? The first development is the upcoming Land Sector and Removals Guidance by GHG Protocol, due mid-2024. It will present a more standardized and comparable approach to quantify the impacts of changes in farming practices on emissions, from deforestation to soil carbon storage. Accurate measurement and verification of such effects will be crucial in promoting carbon sequestration processes attributable to specific companies and products. The second is the Forestry, Land and Agriculture (FLAG) guidance by the Science-based Targets Initiative (SBTi), issued in September 2022. Agri-businesses must separate their GHG emissions into two buckets. 1) energy and industry emissions, 2) FLAG emissions that occur ‘to farm gate’, i.e. before agricultural commodities are sent off-farm for processing. Companies must now set separate targets and decarbonisation pathways for each bucket of emissions, ensuring a focus on both energy/industry and land emissions sources. The FLAG guidance helps companies to decarbonise by enabling verifiable carbon removals on the farm to be subtracted from FLAG emissions, reflecting a lower corporate carbon footprint even for downstream companies like food processors and retailers. It will help incentivise and support climate action within the agri-business value chain rather than using carbon offsets outside the supply chain, leading to longer-term resilience in our food systems. How do companies strategies sustainable farming practices? Offsets versus on-farm carbon removals :Take the scenario of a packaged food manufacturer (Company A) that sources grains from thousands of smallholder farmers upstream. Company A calculates its greenhouse gas emissions in a carbon offset landscape and compensates for its emissions by buying the same volume in carbon credits to claim carbon neutrality. The carbon credit provider, in turn, finances projects outside the value chain of Company A. These could be energy efficiency, blue carbon, forestry or waste management projects, to name a few. The carbon credits do not directly benefit the company's value chain stakeholders, in this case, smallholder farmers. Nor is Company A incentivised to understand its supply chain and the low-hanging interventions needed to decarbonise the grains being produced for Company A. Compare this to another scenario, Company B, a plant-based ingredients purchaser in Asia serving customers worldwide. Company B purchases from thousands of smallholder farmers in the region. Company B sets a science-based net zero target with the new carbon accounting guidance, including FLAG and the opportunity to track carbon removals. Company B aims to decarbonise upstream emissions by supporting smallholder farmer regenerative agriculture. Some key strategies include zero deforestation, site-specific fertiliser application, valorising waste to produce biofertilizers and restore soils, and other sustainable farming practices. These can create additional revenue, cost savings, and reduce emissions. Company B monitors fertiliser application practices, forest cover, irrigation practices and other critical indicators in its sourcing regions through remote sensing with satellites and farm-based data collection. Per the new carbon accounting guidance, the resultant carbon removals can be counted towards FLAG emission reduction targets by Company B and its customers down the food supply chain, aligning incentives for net zero and reducing corporate emissions. How can agri-businesses create opportunities to reduce emissions in their process value chain? System change through value chains: The example shows that the two new guidelines create opportunities for agri-businesses to reduce their Scope 3 emissions by focusing on their value chain. According to the Asia Food Challenge report, over two-thirds of Asia's agri-food value chain emissions occur before the produce leaves the farm gate. Smallholder farms typically produce more emissions per unit of commodity due to limited machinery, and infrastructure access. Farmers lack incentives for optimal agronomic practices, resulting in less efficient input use, lower yields, and food loss. About 17% of food produced in Asia is lost before leaving the farm, compared to a global average of 15%, due to inadequate storage. Large agri-businesses can support upstream smallholder farmers to decarbonise through for example longer-term offtake contracts, financing arrangements, knowledge, and access to technology for improved practices. Critical concomitant benefits include greater biodiversity and community engagement. Decarbonisation objectives can help future-proof agri-businesses by creating resilient value chains that carbon offsets outside of a company’s value chain may not achieve. Primary data and supply chain traceability become essential for food and beverage companies heavily dependent on land resources in their value chain. For primary data, companies must have data related to the specific supplier’s carbon sinks and pools where carbon is stored. Traceability requires the company to trace the carbon removal's physical location throughout the removal pathway. Only with such reliable data can Company B claim the carbon removals per the new accounting guidance and continuously manage reductions along its value chain. The global broadening and deepening of regulatory requirements for land sector emissions warrant more emphasis on data quality and management. As a case in point, The European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR)[1] will establish strict measures to prevent companies from exporting or placing EU products linked to deforestation or forest degradation. This legislation will cover cattle, cocoa, coffee, palm oil, soya, wood, rubber, charcoal printed paper products, and derived products such as leather, chocolate and furniture, and palm oil derivatives, with compliance to EUDR becoming mandatory by the end of 2024. Such legislation only reinforces the need for supply chain traceability down to the farm level, complementing the FLAG guidance. For exporters to the EU from different parts of the world, including Asia, the computation, management and disclosure of such information is an increasingly crucial requirement. Decarbonising with imperfect data Food is in focus. The agri-food sector accounts for 34% of global emissions. The two new guidance documents for land sector emissions allow credible on-farm carbon removals to be counted in annual corporate carbon footprints across the agri-food value chain. This makes meeting net zero targets more attainable and incentivises emissions reductions within upstream value chains, especially smallholder farmers in emerging markets. However, companies planning to count carbon removals must invest in measuring it through supply chain traceability, primary data, and more. Technology solutions for the new land sector carbon accounting requirements are readily available. Expect to start with imperfect data and improve over time. Obtaining data that reflects real-world supplier changes will be an iterative process, with the pace of investments in both the data and the decarbonisation solutions driven by the regulatory and competitive environments already underway. The direction is clear. Lia Nicholson is the Head of Sustainability at Terrascope, a climate leader, and has been the interface of national and local government, business, and civil society across the Caribbean, West Africa, and the Pacific. Lia was a climate negotiator in the United Nations and senior advisor to the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) - a bloc of 39 countries facing existential climate risks and considered the moral voice for climate action. Lia spent several years with C40 Cities Climate Leadership in West Africa, where she supported the mayor’s offices in Abidjan, Accra, Dakar and Lagos to prepare city-level GHG inventories and develop Paris Agreement-aligned climate action plans. Exclusive contribution to AgroSpectrum Asia ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1784/unfccc-reviews-to-increasing-bidirectional-agricultural-investments-in-asia.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1784/unfccc-reviews-to-increasing-bidirectional-agricultural-investments-in-asia.html Fri, 02 Feb 2024 08:19:00 +0530 The focus on agriculture is critical for a region as vulnerable to climate change as Asia. Food systems comprise one-third of global anthropogenic emissions, and close to 20 per cent of the global food supply chain is in Asia, making it a critical region for climate-smart agricultural investments. Food security is extremely susceptible to the changing climate, and any effort to address the climate crisis must address the destructive impacts of global food systems. A region like Asia that is vulnerable to climate change should pay close attention to the agriculture focus. Across Asia, climate change is posing a high risk to food security. Despite encompassing two-thirds of the global population, only 450 million smallholder  farmers with limited land and resources are responsible for producing 80% of the region’s food, adding more pressure on the food-insecure region. Half of the world’s undernourished population — 371 million people — reside in the Asia Pacific. The warming climate, decreasing crop yields, and rising food prices in the region are expected to push the number of undernourished people in Asia to 330 million by 2030.  Insufficient action and overly ambitious targets could make for potentially dire circumstances. The FAO’s ambitious roadmap of rapidly transforming the global food system has been criticized by some as being predicated on the “availability and affordability” of agri-technology, which is lacking in many smallholder farms. The roadmap has also been criticized for being out of step with the 2022 Global Biodiversity Framework on nature and biodiversity. Despite the multitude of commitments and financing packages, recent COP28 came under fire for the role that meat and dairy lobbyists played in hindering negotiations. This subset of the agricultural sector is responsible for about 37% of methane emissions, a potent greenhouse gas. And while the outcome of the First Global Stocktake — an inventory of states’ efforts to meet their Paris Agreement obligations play role in sustainable agriculture in addressing climate change, but it failed to include specific actions on reducing agriculture-related emissions. Advancing climate-smart agriculture within Asia Grow Asia, a sustainable food systems investment forum, was officially launched in 2015 as a partnership between the World Economic Forum and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), with funding from the Australian and Canadian governments. The platform seeks to foster greater engagement within the agricultural sector in scaling up the adoption of “more inclusive, resilient and sustainable food systems.” In 2022, Grow Asia launched a C$2.1-million multi-donor impact fund to support women in the Asian agri-food industry. Together with the Canadian government, working through the International Development Research Centre and U.S.-based agri-tech company Corteva Agriscience, the fund has since evolved into the ASEAN Green Recovery through Equity and Empowerment Project and has helped revitalize gender-inclusive investments and support for women-led farming initiatives in Cambodia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. From 2003 to 2022, Canada invested more than C$7.7 billion in the Asia Pacific agricultural sector. During the same period, Asian economies invested about C$2.5 billion in Canada, with the greatest inward investments coming from Japan, China, and Thailand. As part of its 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan, Canada is allocating C$470 million to the Agricultural Climate Solutions: On-Farm Climate Action Fund. This fund aims to assist farmers in adopting sustainable practices. The private sector is also actively engaged in climate-smart agriculture. Power Sustainable, a Toronto-based equity investor, introduced the C$300-million Lios Fund I in June 2021 to support companies within the food value chain that embrace sustainability trends impacting the sector. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1762/trends-2024-asia-pacifics-fb-industry-anticipates-a-slew-of-new-trends.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1762/trends-2024-asia-pacifics-fb-industry-anticipates-a-slew-of-new-trends.html Mon, 29 Jan 2024 07:22:00 +0530 By Christian Philippsen, Managing Director, BENEO, Asia Pacific With every new year that unfolds, Asia Pacific’s F&B industry anticipates a slew of new trends. Among them, is the predicted rise of the adventurous consumer. According to Mintel, “amid ongoing uncertainty and anxiety, consumers will seek experiential food and drink that is enjoyable, fuels productivity and transports them to new realms.” How do you foresee the potential plant-based alternative protein industry holds for the future? A global study found that 7 in 10 consumers have a desire to experience interesting textures, and to be surprised in some way. 2 Specifically, countries in the Asia Pacific region such as the Philippines have almost 8 in 10 consumers saying that eating and drinking is the main way they connect with family and friends. 3 This connection can be further fuelled by novel, adventurous food choices that bring variety to the table, and increase connectivity amongst different generations due to a shared experience of new taste sensations. But while the adventurous consumer is eager to set forth on their culinary journey, they have alsounderscored the need for a balance between taste, price, health, and sustainability. These individuals are seeking food products that not only transport them to new dimensions, but also meet their nutritional, economic and social criteria. In light of this emerging trend, food manufacturers are looking towards sectors such as the plant- based industry to captivate the adventurous consumer. The industry holds enormous growth potential, and plant-based products are well positioned to meet this proliferating consumer demand. However, in an environment where the appeal for plant-based burger patties has dwindled, food developers must look towards creating new offerings that keep consumers wanting more. What are the novel strategies at alternative meat industry adopted to elevate palates and textures of Plant-Based Products?To pave the way for a new plant-based future, manufacturers must prioritise taste, texture, and indulgence. Taste stands out as a critical component of plant-based success, and advancements such as BeneoPro W-Tex, a textured wheat protein, allows manufacturers to craft a diverse range of flavours. This flexible meat substitute can also be infused with a variety of tastes, herbs, and spices. Moreover, consumers are seeking plant-based alternatives that mimic the textures of popular, everyday foods. For instance, BeneoPro W-Tex can be utilised in a wide range of applications, especially products with meat analogues such as sausages and chicken nuggets. With a protein content of at least 65% (on dry matter) and a unique alveolar structure, it facilitates the development of a juicy-like texture. Elevating Palates and Textures of Plant-Based ProductsTo pave the way for a new plant-based future, manufacturers must prioritise taste, texture, and indulgence. Taste stands out as a critical component of plant-based success, and advancements such as BeneoPro W-Tex, a textured wheat protein, allows manufacturers to craft a diverse range of flavours. This flexible meat substitute can also be infused with a variety of tastes, herbs, and spices. Moreover, consumers are seeking plant-based alternatives that mimic the textures of popular, everyday foods. For instance, BeneoPro W-Tex can be utilised in a wide range of applications, especially products with meat analogues such as sausages and chicken nuggets. With a protein content of at least 65% (on dry matter) and a unique alveolar structure, it facilitates the development of a juicy-like texture. Increasing the Feel-Good FactorIndulgence will also be key in satisfying the adventurous consumer this year. A recent study found that product packaging should steer clear of mentioning the words ‘alternative and substitute’ as they may evoke feelings of sacrifice. 4 Instead, careful wording that underscores the indulgent and gratifying nature of plant-based products enhances their appeal to the adventurous consumer. How can the food industry broaden the Plant-Based alternative protein ingredient horizon? Ingredients such as rice, a popular Asian staple, can play a crucial role in creating guilt-free sweet treats. For instance, BENEO’s functional native rice starches generate high stability for foods with demanding processing conditions, such as low pH values or high shear forces. In addition, rice starch is mild in taste and neutral in colour, and is especially attractive to consumers who are lactose intolerant and experience other digestive health issues. Its instant variant is also particularly suitable for products that are processed cold, such as desserts or bakery cream. It also enables the development of plant-based cocoa bars, providing a nice flavour, good snap, smooth mouthfeel, and excellent melting behaviour. Rice ingredients are also a viable solution to the demand for clean-label products. In fact, rice starch and rice flour score highly in this context as consumers perceive them as a natural and familiar cupboard ingredient, with 61 and 71 % of consumers worldwide regarding rice starch and rice flour as natural respectively. Beyond prioritising taste, texture, and indulgence, food manufacturers can broaden their horizons by exploring new product categories that resonate with the adventurous consumer. One such category is Asian-inspired recipes, an increasingly popular and attractive group of foods among consumers globally. By harnessing innovative ingredients such as BENEO’s textured wheat protein or rice starches, manufacturers can craft plant-based versions of traditional Asian dishes such as xiao long bao, Thai basil pork, siew mai, and steamed buns. In 2024, placing a heightened emphasis on taste, texture, and indulgence will be pivotal, especially as food manufacturers expand their product categories in the plant-based sector. This provides an opportune time to harness plant-based ingredients and transform them into exciting, unique products that live up to the demands of the adventurous consumer. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1753/regenerative-food-systems-food-and-health-systems-can-finance-transformation-new-kearney-report-reveals.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1753/regenerative-food-systems-food-and-health-systems-can-finance-transformation-new-kearney-report-reveals.html Tue, 23 Jan 2024 11:51:55 +0530 Global management consultancy Kearney has released a new report revealing how food and healthcare systems can and should work in unison to unlock funding to create a healthy food future. The report, Food for thought: financing the food system transition, highlights the link between how we produce and process our food, and the health of our planet and its eight billion inhabitants. Compounding crises: ecosystem and human sickness The report highlights the urgency of our current compounding crises. Unhealthy foods drive chronic illnesses, and ecological degradation (soil, air, and water) drives further malnutrition and hunger. The four leading causes of death are directly linked to diet: stroke, diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular disease. We produce enough calories to feed everyone on Earth, but 350 million people still experience acute levels of food insecurity. Transition costs are high, but the cost of inaction is much higher The report defines regenerative food systems as outcome-focused, healthy, inclusive, and adapted to local community and crop needs. A regenerative food system can help restore degraded ecosystems; reduce greenhouse gases and sequester carbon; and keep soil healthy, water clean, and foster biodiversity. A regenerative approach also encourages good human health, from the chemicals used to the ingredient choices made by food manufacturers. The report finds that while the transition costs toward a regenerative food system are high, the cost of inaction is even higher and includes: $4.3 trillion in health and obesity costs $16.3 trillion in hidden environmental and socioeconomic losses $3 trillion in economic losses from 4.2 billion people affected by climate disasters since 2000 Playing past a stalemate The report advocates for transformative initiatives at scale, moving beyond the current financing stalemate. According to Kearney’s expert interviewees, most stakeholders are waiting for someone else to take the lead. Often, they are not acting at scale because of limited, short-term incentive structures. Furthermore, investment capital is unequally distributed. The report explores how large food, beverage, and agriculture companies can use their influence across the value chain and their financial wherewithal to encourage transformation. They also have a lot to gain, including capitalizing on Kearney Consumer Institute research showing the value of joint health–sustainability products and brands. Companies can also secure supply chains that are poorly prepared for a climate-changed world. Looking at new business value, research finds $4.5 trillion per year could be unlocked during a regenerative transformation. Meanwhile, healthcare agencies, providers, insurers, and government agencies can scale successful “food as medicine” initiatives while, at the same time, driving market demand and premiums for healthy, regenerative food. Research in the report shows billions in savings if these programs are scaled to national levels. Rhiannon Thomas, global lead, consumer and retail at Kearney, says, “Food and health systems are inexorably linked. Today, too many of the dynamics between these systems incentivize poor human and ecosystem health, costing the public and private sectors trillions in hidden costs. While a scaled transformation to a healthy, regenerative food system is costly, the costs of inaction are higher. By working across intertwined systems, we can overcome the functional stalemate in funding to deliver on a 21st-century food system mission: feeding the world by regenerating human and ecosystem health.” Angela Hultberg, global sustainability director at Kearney, says "Too often, we frame global challenges as technology innovation gaps, and spend huge money, time, and energy investing in technology solutions for short-term symptoms without addressing root causes. Instead, we must innovate incentives, technologies, business models, and policies that embrace our fundamental dependence on natural ecosystems—soil, water, microbes, climate—all of which can be supported by a regenerative food system.” ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1706/reimagining-plant-based-milk-beverages-harnessing-the-value-of-faba-bean-and-palatinose.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1706/reimagining-plant-based-milk-beverages-harnessing-the-value-of-faba-bean-and-palatinose.html Wed, 10 Jan 2024 09:05:56 +0530 By Christian Philippsen, Managing Director, BENEO, Asia Pacific Demand for dairy alternative products have been on the rise in Asia Pacific as consumers have become increasingly health and environmentally conscious, coupled with the rise in disposable income in urban areas. By 2028, the region is projected to experience the fastest rate of growth in the dairy alternatives market. Among dairy alternative products, plant-based milk is a progressively popular substitute for traditional cow’s milk. For instance, in Singapore, a significant 62% of consumers who have tried plant-based milk beverages consume it regularly, with 20% willing to switch their default dairy option to a plant-based alternative. In the region, a substantial 40% of consumers expressed that having high protein levels is a key factor that influences their decision to consume plant-based milk drinks. Recognising this characteristic as a pivotal factor in the decision-making process, food manufacturers have a valuable opportunity to tap into the growing popularity of plant-based milk by injecting higher protein content. The high solubility of faba beans creates a beautifully homogenous and stable drink with a pleasant texture and good taste, without any sediment or a sandy mouthfeel in the beverage. Unique attributes enable food manufacturers to develop plant-based milk drinks that not only meet nutritional standards, but also delight tastebuds. The amalgamation of benefits helps to sustain the demand for plant-based milk beverages, such as oat milk. The Asia-Pacific oat milk market is estimated at $353.90 million in 2023, and is anticipated to reach $700.75 million by 2029. Extensive scientific research has shown that adopting a carbohydrate-based diet with lower impact on blood glucose levels reduces the risk for developing metabolic diseases such as diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and possibly overweight and obesity. Consuming high-quality carbohydrates also improves one’s metabolic health and immune system, in turn helping the body fight against viruses. Functional ingredients not only serve as nourishing alternatives to traditional components, but also fulfil consumers’ desire for environmentally conscious consumption. As the demand for plant-based milk continues to grow in the region, the incorporation of innovative functional ingredients paves the way for an even more sustainable future for plant-based milk. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1549/global-organic-fertilizers-market-valued-at-13-5-billion-by-2028-unveils-bcc-research.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1549/global-organic-fertilizers-market-valued-at-13-5-billion-by-2028-unveils-bcc-research.html Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:19:43 +0530 The global organic fertilizers market is witnessing significant expansion, driven by increasing awareness of sustainable agricultural practices and the rising preference for eco-friendly products. With advancements in production techniques and technology, accessibility to organic fertilizers has improved, fostering market growth. A shift towards organic and holistic farming approaches further propels the market, although challenges such as cost differentials and supply-demand gaps persist. An analysis of the competitive landscape, market dynamics, value chain, consumer preferences, and emerging trends can provide valuable insights into this thriving sector. "According to the latest research Study by BCC, the demand for Organic Fertilizers: Global Markets is estimated to increase from $9.7 billion in 2023 to reach $13.5 billion by 2028, at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.8% from 2023 through 2028." This comprehensive report provides a thorough examination of the organic fertilizer market, offering insightful market estimates and projections up to 2028. With a focus on various aspects, including source, crop type, type, and form, the report delves into key market players, competitive strategies, technological advancements, and regional prospects. Through an analysis of the industry's CAGR, recent developments, and product portfolios of major players, the report facilitates a comprehensive understanding of market trends. Moreover, it segments the global market across North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Middle East & and Africa, and Latin America, presenting data from 2022 as the base year, alongside forecasts until the conclusion of 2028. Emphasizing the drivers, dynamics, and prevalent trends within each regional organic fertilizer market, the report offers valuable insights into the market landscape, featuring detailed profiles of prominent vendors. The growing concerns over food safety have led to an increased demand for organic food worldwide. Instances of food contamination with harmful chemical residues, such as the European Union's ban on Mexico's strawberries and the US CDC's warning about lead in apple juice, have intensified this shift. With Australia leading as the largest organic food producer, the organic market is experiencing heightened competition as traditional chemical fertilizer companies diversify into the organic sector. Notably, the investment of $9.4 million by the USDA, combined with the rising trend of tobacco farmers in Brazil transitioning to organic farming, emphasizes the favourable timing and lucrative prospects in the organic food industry. As more agricultural land globally is converted to organic cultivation, innovative approaches like biofertilizers and mycorrhizal fungi products continue to gain traction, contributing to the market's overall momentum. Driving forces behind the organic fertilizer market's growth comprise: Global expansion of organic farming has ushered in a significant surge in the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices, amplifying the demand for organic fertilizers worldwide. The increasing adoption of organic practices by conventional farmers reflects a growing awareness of the long-term benefits associated with organic fertilizers, promoting soil health and sustainable crop yields. With emerging markets showcasing a rising preference for organic produce, the heightened demand for organic fertilizers has spurred innovation and investment in this sector, catering to the evolving needs of agricultural economies. Tailored organic fertilizer formulations designed for specific crops have revolutionized the agricultural landscape, offering targeted and effective solutions that enhance crop quality and yield, thereby driving market growth. Collaborative efforts with sustainable agriculture initiatives have reinforced the commitment to environmentally friendly farming practices, fostering partnerships that prioritize eco-conscious methods, including the use of organic fertilizers for sustainable crop production. The integration of organic fertilizers within regenerative farming systems has proven instrumental in enhancing soil fertility, reducing environmental impact, and promoting overall ecosystem health, contributing to the sustained expansion of the organic fertilizer market.  The Rising Demand for Organic Fertilizers: The growing awareness of the harmful effects of chemical fertilizers on both human health and the environment has fueled the demand for organic fertilizers worldwide. Consumers are increasingly prioritizing organic produce, leading to a surge in the adoption of organic farming methods. As a result, the global market for organic fertilizers is experiencing an upward trajectory, projected to reach unprecedented heights in the coming years. Trends and Innovations: In response to this heightened demand, the organic fertilizer market has witnessed notable innovations and trends. From tailored organic formulations for specific crop types to the integration of advanced technologies like biofertilizers and mycorrhizal fungi products, the industry is continuously evolving. Additionally, strategic collaborations with sustainable agriculture initiatives have paved the way for the development of circular supply chains, emphasizing eco-friendly and regenerative farming practices. Challenges and Opportunities: While the organic fertilizer industry is flourishing, it is not without its challenges. Factors such as cost differentials compared to conventional fertilizers and the existing gap between supply and demand pose significant hurdles. However, these challenges also present opportunities for further innovation and investment in the sector, especially as government initiatives and investments continue to support the growth of organic farming practices globally. The Global Landscape: With Australia leading as the largest organic food producer and various countries worldwide transitioning towards sustainable agricultural practices, the organic fertilizer market's global landscape is both dynamic and promising. Regions like Asia-Pacific, North America, and Europe are at the forefront of this transformation, emphasizing the need for sustainable and environmentally friendly farming practices on a global scale. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1355/revolutionizing-modern-agriculture-with-nano-fertilizers.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1355/revolutionizing-modern-agriculture-with-nano-fertilizers.html Fri, 01 Sep 2023 11:16:35 +0530 A nano fertilizer can deliver nutrients more efficiently than traditional fertilizers, reducing waste and improving plant growth. A relatively new development in fertilizers, nano fertilizers deliver nutrients to plants more effectively and efficiently than traditional fertilizers. Nano fertilizers are composed of tiny particles with dimensions of one billionth of a meter or smaller. They are composed of nanonutrients, which are ultra-minute particles of nutrient ions. Plants grow better and produce more when nutrients are delivered specifically to specific tissues. Fertilizers traditionally consist of macro-sized particles that dissolve in soil and release nutrients for plants to absorb. Nanofertilizers typically have particle sizes of less than 1000 nanometers and are about 40,000 times smaller than human hair. A nanofertilizer consists of particles that are much smaller and are designed to penetrate plant tissue and deliver nutrients directly into cells. Plant nutrients are delivered to plants more efficiently and effectively with nano fertilizers. A variety of materials can be utilized for the manufacture of nano fertilizers, including silica, zinc oxide, and carbon nanotubes. In addition to foliar spraying, seed coating, and root dipping, they can also be applied to plants through a number of different methods. Plant growth and productivity are improved by an effective targeted delivery system that ensures plants receive the nutrients in the right amounts. Agricultural productivity and sustainability can be enhanced with nano fertilizers. Using them can make fertilizers more efficient, reduce environmental pollution, and make plants more resistant to diseases and droughts. Advantages and benefits of the nan0-fertiliser process: Various nano fertilizers can be used, such as nanochelated micronutrient fertilizers, nanosilicon fertilizers, nanoorganic fertilizers, nanoslow-release fertilizers, and nanobiofertilizers. Nano fertilizers offer several advantages over traditional fertilizers, including improved efficiency, reduced waste, and increased nutrient uptake. Some drawbacks of these materials, however, include potential toxicity and high production costs.  Nevertheless, Nano fertilizers are considered to be having the potential to reduce environmental pollution by minimizing the amount of excess nutrients that are released into the environment. Furthermore, nano fertilizers help plants resist environmental stressors such as droughts and diseases. Plant defense mechanisms are activated by some types of nano fertilizers, such as silicon nanoparticle fertilizers, which can increase resistance to biotic and abiotic stress. Associated challenges and regulatory policies  A potential health risk associated with nano fertilizers is one of their concerns. Because nanoparticles are so small, soil and water systems may have difficulties accumulating them. Silver nanoparticles, for example, have been shown to have toxic effects on soil microbes and other organisms. Silica and carbon nanoparticles, however, have been found to be relatively safe. Many countries have regulations and policies governing the production, use, and disposal of nano fertilizers in order to ensure their safety. A major consideration for the widespread adoption of nano fertilizers in agriculture is their cost-effectiveness. In spite of the higher cost of nano fertilizers, their targeted delivery system may increase efficiency and reduce waste, which might offset the higher price. Nano fertilizers are cost-effective when used in combination with certain crops and conditions. Production costs, application rates, and crop types all play a role in their cost-effectiveness. Nano fertilizers market dynamics and key players The nano fertilizer market is segmented on the raw materials, methods of applications and application. Based on raw materials, the market is segmented into nitrogen, silver, carbon, zinc and others. Based on the methods of applications, the nano fertilizer market is segmented into a spray or foliar and soil. Based on applications, the nano fertilizer market is segmented into cereals & grains, oilseeds & pulses, fruits & vegetables and others In recent year, EuroChem Group AG entered into exclusive discussions to buy the nitrogen business of the Borealis group. Borealis is also a melamine market leader, with plants in Austria and Germany supplying the critical raw ingredient principally to the woodworking sector. Melamine and technical nitrogen solutions are significant new business streams for EuroChem as it seeks to extend its nitrogen-based product range throughout Europe. Some other major key players in the Nano Fertilizer market are: Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Limited Lazuriton Nano Biotechnology Co., Ltd. Fanavar Nano-Pazhoohesh Markazi Company Tropical Agrosystem India (P) Ltd. EuroChem Shan Maw Myae Trading Co., Ltd Geolife Group AG CHEMI Group, s.r.o. JU Agri Sciences Pvt. Ltd. Nano Solutions and more Nano fertilizers are projected to grow in the coming years as chemical fertilizers are increasingly replaced by nano fertilizers. Innovative developments in nanotechnology have made it possible to synthesize nanoparticles at large scales to create nano-fertilizers. Globally, the demand for nano fertilizers is expected to grow due to the growing population over the next five years. A growing demand for crops with higher yields will further support the growth of the nano fertilizer industry worldwide. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1014/vietnams-business-potential-in-agri-fisheries-and-key-development-statistics.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1014/vietnams-business-potential-in-agri-fisheries-and-key-development-statistics.html Mon, 05 Jun 2023 17:53:00 +0530 Vietnam vigorously focuses on its Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishery industries The Agriculture and Rural Development Ministry reports production and agribusiness reports for May 2023. Agri-commodities According to the department, Vietnam is currently focusing on the cultivation of winter-spring crops in southern localities. Rice, is one of the major staple foods of Vietnam's South East Asian culture, the country cultivated nearly 4,255.8 thousand hectares of rice. The harvest reached 2,589.4 thousand hectares with an average yield of 67.4 quintals/ha, up 1.0 quintals/ha. In summary, the harvested output reached 17.46 million tons. Especially, "winter-spring rice" is another variety of rice in the country with a cultivation rate of 2,952.1 thousand hectares and a harvest of 2,235.5 thousand hectares. However, harvest yield is estimated at 69.2 quintals/ha, an increase of 0.9 quintals/ha; harvested output reached 15.47 million tons. Particularly in the Mekong Delta province (Mekong Delta), 1,478.7 thousand hectares were harvested with a harvest yield of 72.0 quintals/ha, up 1.2 quintals/ha; harvested output reached about 10.7 million tons. "Summer-Autumn Rice" has been cultivated up to 1,303.7 thousand hectares, 1,030.7 thousand hectares in the Mekong Delta alone. Among the other high yielding and well cultivated crops in Vietnam, are pulses and grains. Vietnam reports planting 417.3 thousand hectares of corn, 49.3 thousand hectares of sweet potatoes, 12.6 thousand hectares of soybeans, and 111.3 thousand hectares of groundnuts. Particularly, vegetables and legumes 637.3 thousand hectares. Animal husbandry By May 2023, cattle and poultry farming developed steadily in Vietnam. However, the epidemic still has many potential risks of outbreak, the risk of influenza virus strains and other epidemics infecting from abroad; the price of animal feed remains high, the smuggling of livestock products; Meanwhile, prices of livestock products remain low. As of May, the buffalo herd decreased by about 2%, the cow herd increased by 1.2%, the pig herd increased by 2.6%, and the poultry herd increased by 1.3%. As of May 23, the whole country had 01 outbreak of Blue Ear in Cao Bang; 03 outbreaks of avian influenza in Quang Ngai and Hanoi; there are 02 FMD outbreaks in Thai Nguyen and Gia Lai; there were 17 outbreaks of African swine fever in 08 provinces and cities and 09 outbreaks of dermatitis in Thai Nguyen, Quang Binh and Quang Ngai in less than 21 days. In the first five months of the year, the number of cattle and poultry killed and culled was about 17,438 animals (12,789 poultry and 4,649 cattle). Forestry During the month, localities continue to plant forests, monitor, protect, and prevent forest fires, and have stable logging activities. In May, the country cultivated 69 million seedlings by planting 18.3 thousand hectares of forest. The amount of timber harvested is estimated at 1,956 thousand cubic meters (m3). Accumulation In 5 months, the whole country prepared over 558 million trees and planted 85.6 thousand hectares of forest. This was followed by an estimated timber production of 6,583.3 thousand m3. Forest fire prevention and control are being prioritized in Vietnam, especially in high-risk areas like the Northwest and Central Highlands. The National Forestry Planning Report and the Report explaining opinions of National Appraisal Council members are being improved by Vietnam. Fisheries Fishing tends to increase again because gasoline prices are gradually stabilizing. Aquaculture production in May 2023 was estimated at 783.3 thousand tons and the production for 2023 upuntil has reached 3,420.3 thousand tons. In May, aquaculture output was estimated at 421 thousand tons with an estimate of 1,837.2 thousand tons for the year 2023 up until. It includes species like pangasius 632 thousand tons, shrimp 329.3 thousand tons, and white shrimp 213.1 thousand tons. In Vietnam, aquatic resources are being protected from exploitation. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1020/differentiated-portfolio-and-strong-execution-drives-helps-target-sustainable-growth-2025.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1020/differentiated-portfolio-and-strong-execution-drives-helps-target-sustainable-growth-2025.html Mon, 05 Jun 2023 16:34:00 +0530 By Chuck Magro, Chief Executive Officer, Corteva Corteva delivered a solid start to 2023, reflecting focused execution coupled with continueddemand for our innovative technology solutions. Our strategic actions to focus our portfolio inareas where we deliver differentiated value to customers are translating into accelerated growth innew product sales, continued margin expansion, and higher quality earnings. Ag fundamentals remain constructive as tight global grain supply continues to put pressure onending stocks, keeping crop prices above historical averages and farm income levels healthy. Wealso see customer buying behaviors beginning to normalize as supply chain reliability improves. We are on track to deliver our 2025 financial objectives as our leading R&D organizationcontinues to invest in new and differentiated technologies to drive a more sustainable global foodand fuel system. In the first Quarter 2023, net sales rose 6% versus the prior year with gains in both segments. Organic sales increased 10% in the same period, led by EMEA and North America. Seed net sales grew 7% and organic1 sales increased 10%. Price gains were led by the continued execution on the Corteva’s price-for-value strategy and recovery of higher input costs. Volume declines were driven by a shortened Safrinha season, supply constraints in Latin America, and the exit from Russia. Crop Protection net sales grew 5% and organic sales increased 10%, led by value capture in EMEA. Price gains reflected strong execution in response to cost inflation. Volume gains from continued penetration of new products, including EnlistTM and ArylexTM herbicides, were more than offset by product exits and delays in Latin America and APAC due to weather. GAAP income and earnings per share (EPS) from continuing operations were $607 million and $0.84 per share for the first quarter of 2023, respectively. Operating EBITDA1 and Operating EPS1 were $1.23 billion and $1.16 per share, respectively. Strong price execution, product mix, and productivity actions more than offset inflation and currency headwinds. Corteva increased full-year 2023 guidance to include the impact of the Biologicals acquisitions and expects net sales in the range of $18.6 billion to $18.9 billion. Operating EBITDA1 is expected to be in the range of $3.55 billion to $3.75 billion. Operating EPS1 is expected to be in the range of $2.80 to $3.00 per share. New Product Launches During the Quarter Reinforce Value of Innovation Pipeline Corteva announced plans for the commercial launch of Optimum® GLY Canola - a new, proprietary glyphosate trait technology intended to deliver enhanced weed control and a wider window of herbicide application, compared to firstgeneration glyphosate trait technology – so farmers have more choices and flexibility for effective weed management. Corteva also announced the commercial launch of VorceedTM Enlist® Corn, which combines three modes of action for above-ground insect protection and three modes of action for below-ground insect protection including RNAi technology. It also includes tolerance to four herbicides – glyphosate, glufosinate, 2,4-D choline and FOPs – to help improve resistant weed management. Finally, the Corteva announced the commercial launch of AdaveltTM Active - a novel fungicide with a new mode of action that protects against a wide range of diseases that can impact crop yields. Corteva received product registrations in Australia, Canada, and South Korea, and plans to offer Adavelt TM Active in additional countries in the future, pending regulatory approvals. Acquisition of Symborg and Stoller, Two Leading Biologicals Companies During the quarter, the Corteva acquired Symborg, an expert in microbiological technologies based in Murcia, Spain; and Stoller, one of the largest independent companies in the Biologicals industry with an expertise in plant health and nutrition, based in Houston, Texas. These investments reinforce the Corteva ’s commitment to providing farmers with sustainable tools that deliver optionality, enhanced value, and increased productivity. These acquisitions, when combined with its internal innovation capabilities, cement Corteva’s Biologicals business as one of the largest in the world, with a platform positioned to accelerate growth within the rapidly expanding biologicals market. Collaborations to Bring Sustainable Solutions to Farmers During the quarter, the Corteva announced a multi-year collaboration with Bunge to develop and commercialize new soybean varieties with greater protein content, optimized amino acid profiles and lower levels of anti-nutritional factors for the animal feed industry. In-line with Corteva’s commitment to delivering sustainable innovation to its customers, these products present a potential new value stream opportunity for farmers while giving feed compounders a more nutritious option to reduce their use of synthetic additives, lower costs, and shrink their carbon footprint. Separately, the Corteva announced a commercial collaboration with Bunge and Chevron U.S.A. Inc., a subsidiary of Chevron Corporation, to introduce proprietary winter canola hybrids intended to increase availability of plant-based oil feedstocks for the biofuel market. As part of a new double crop system in the southern U.S., this innovation will deliver solutions for farmers to increase productivity and income on their acres, while contributing to market expansion for lower carbon fuel options. Further, winter canola can act as a cover crop to enhance soil health and make farming practices even more sustainable. ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1023/china-embraces-big-data-based-unmanned-farms-to-reduce-costs-and-enhance-agri-land-use.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1023/china-embraces-big-data-based-unmanned-farms-to-reduce-costs-and-enhance-agri-land-use.html Mon, 05 Jun 2023 13:55:43 +0530 The application of Beidou’s big data in the field of agricultural production continues to advance In China, unmanned farms based on Beidou’s big data technology were developed rapidly in 2022. The China Satellite Navigation and Positioning Association recently released the 2023 'White Paper on the Development of China's Satellite Navigation and Location Service Industry’ in Beijing. The service scope and service forms of Beidou's big data in the agricultural field will continue to expand, as per the white paper. 13 provinces across the country have started the construction of 26 unmanned farms, with significant cost savings and efficiency gains, an average increase of 30 per cent for every 60 square metres, a 60 per cent reduction in labour costs, a 50 per cent increase in agricultural machinery operation efficiency and energy saving 50 per cent, effectively improving the efficiency of agricultural production and the level of information, modernisation and intelligence.  In 2022, domestic agricultural machinery equipped with Beidou terminals played an important role in grain production throughout the year. During the summer harvest season and the autumn grain harvest stage, more than 50,000 and 12,000 Beidou-based harvesters operated across regions, covering Heilongjiang, Jilin, Inner Mongolia, Hebei, Henan, Shandong, Anhui and other major wheat, rice and corn crops. In production areas, the 2,000 trillion pieces of Beidou agricultural machinery big data have strongly supported the smooth implementation of cross-regional operations and significantly improved agricultural production efficiency. By the end of 2022, Hebei, Jilin, Heilongjiang, Xinjiang and other regions had promoted and applied about 300,000 Beidou terminals in the agricultural field. Among them, the  Beidou self-driving tractors t sowed cotton in Xinjiang,  operating on more than 600 acres per day, improving land use efficiency by 10 per cent and raising the cotton harvesting rate in Xinjiang to 80 per cent. In the fourth quarter of 2022, nearly 1.6 million Beidou terminals of various types were promoted and applied in the agricultural field and the annual operating area has reached more than 60 million mu. Among them, more than 170,000 units/sets of automatic driving systems for agricultural machinery were applied, more than 1.33 million units/sets of remote maintenance and positioning terminals were applied, and more than 90,000 units/sets of onboard terminal equipment for fishing boats were applied. Beidou is China's largest civilian satellite system and one of four global navigation networks, along with the United States GPS, Russia's GLONASS and the European Union's Galileo. Since 2000, 60 Beidou satellites, including the first four experimental ones, were launched on 45 Long March 3 series rockets from Xichang, in Sichuan province. In July 2020, the system began providing full-scale global services. Currently, there are 46 Beidou satellites in active service.  A decline in the enthusiasm of farmers for growing grain, low income in agriculture and the ageing population of rural areas were serious issues mentioned in China Agricultural and Rural Development Report 2020. Agricultural experts in China suggested that unmanned farms can solve these problems by helping reduce labour and improving agricultural production efficiency. With the rapid development of agricultural science technology, the concept of unmanned farms has become important. In China’s 14th Five-Year Plan (2021- 2025) policymakers decided to develop 13 high-quality urban agriculture development pilot zones. Compared with traditional agricultural operations, agricultural machinery with unmanned driving systems saves more than two kilograms of seeds per 60 square meters, increases production by about 10 kilograms per 60 square meters and reduces fuel costs by over 50 per cent. The labour costs were reduced by more than 65 per cent, and the land utilisation rate increased by 0.5 to one per cent. Shraddha Warde shraddha.warde@mmactiv.com ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1646/agriculture-industry-demand-rising-sharply-for-ai-automation-and-advanced-data-analytics.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1646/agriculture-industry-demand-rising-sharply-for-ai-automation-and-advanced-data-analytics.html Wed, 04 Jan 2023 10:25:07 +0530 AgTech Trends 2023 survey indicates that 9 in 10 see AI and data analytics as very important to their future and believe it will drastically change agriculture jobs within the next five years Research findings from the AgTech Trends 2023 survey reveal that while there has been a significant surge in digital transformation initiatives across agribusinesses, many still grapple with deriving actionable insights from their data. The majority of agribusinesses are facing on-farm and off-farm challenges resulting from inaccurate yield predictions and inconsistencies due to complexities in data collection and analysis. Respondents signaled a strong need and desire for digital technology advancements that include AI and automation to support more precise, data-driven decision making across the agrifood value chain. The feedback from 807 U.S.-based agribusiness workers, including executive decision-makers, on-farm managers, agronomists, data scientists, IT specialists and go-to-market professionals, offers a comprehensive look into the agrifood industry’s current state and future trajectory. Key findings include: Anticipating the AI revolution: 9 out of 10 respondents view artificial intelligence (AI) and data analytics as crucial, transformative forces for their future, anticipating substantial changes in agriculture jobs over the next five years. Challenges in data utilization: An overwhelming 92% of respondents find it hard to improve on-farm activities using the current data at their disposal. The road to precision is via automation and AI: More than half of respondents plan to increase investment in on-farm robotics or autonomous systems in the next 24 months in the field (54.8%), for harvesting (60.5%) and for packing (51.3%). Moreover, greater than three-quarters of agribusiness professionals (76.7%) believe that given the amount of data their organization needs to analyze, AI can improve data analysis and the accuracy of yield prediction and estimation. AgTech investment on the rise, investing in the future: In the upcoming year, 60% of agribusinesses are planning to increase their AgTech budget. Their main purchasing priorities are precision agriculture tools (66%), farm management software (60%) and data consolidation (45%). The top three areas of investment in specialty crops are precision agriculture tools, farm management software and data consolidation. A cry for unified data platforms: A significant 96% of respondents expressed the need for a consolidated platform to access essential data and apps for their operations from diverse vendors. Impact of extreme weather: Unpredictable weather, largely due to climate change, is a major concern, with 76% of agribusinesses identifying it as a primary stressor, underscoring the broader concerns about climate change’s impact on yield outputs. The independent industry research delves into the challenges and opportunities faced by agribusinesses concerning data quality, yield prediction accuracy, ROI, benefits and potential of AgTech solutions to transform the agriculture sector. The Yield sponsored the survey to validate the need for its precision yield management solution for specialty crops. Industry optimistic that consistent data collection, predictive analytics, AI and precision agriculture tools will boost profitability amidst climate unpredictability and rising costs The study underscores the urgency to establish consistency in data collection and interpretation. The hurdles, including labor shortages, escalating costs, supply chain inconsistencies and the effects of climate change, have pressed teams to seek more precise future crop yield predictions. Climate change and its ramifications remain a focal concern, with 81.7% worried about its future implications on crop yields. Even with data from established sources like the NOAA, trust in weather predictions remains low. Enhanced and precise weather forecasting stands out as a potential solution, with many seeing it as a way to boost crop quality and reduce weather-related risks. The silver lining is in the industry’s optimism. A vast majority believe that AI and predictive analytics can refine their data analysis processes, driving better and more profitable outcomes. Furthermore, there is a strong and growing inclination towards agricultural technologies, with professionals in the sector foreseeing significant improvements in both on-farm and off-farm processes through AgTech. Interestingly, despite the current challenges, respondents shared a clear positive disposition towards digital tools to comprehend their data and automation to collect data more accurately at scale. This is evident from the notable increases in budget allocations for precision agriculture tools and a future-forward approach to on-farm robotics and autonomous systems. Agribusinesses also recognized the obstacles that stand in the way of digital technology adoption, such as connectivity issues, budget constraints and an overall skepticism towards AI-generated predictions. However, external pressures, including inflation and supply chain inconsistencies, act as catalysts pushing them towards AgTech adoption. Ros Harvey, founder and CEO of The Yield, observed, “Despite a growing interest in and adoption of digital transformation initiatives, many agribusinesses today are struggling to get accurate yield predictions. The biggest challenge is leveraging available data effectively. As the 2023 AgTech Trends research reveals, there exists a palpable need for improving consistency across data collection and interpretation methods, especially as businesses aim for higher yield outcomes at reduced costs. As businesses navigate the complexities of data management, digital transformation emerges as the beacon for a more efficient, accurate and sustainable future. Our Precision Yield Management platform delivers AI-powered on-farm recommendations and yield predictions along the value chain to improve profitability and sustainability.” Key Findings from the Survey Data collection challenges: While nearly 80% of businesses are at the “data exploration” stage or beyond, a mere 21.3% have fully automated their data collection processes. The remaining majority still rely on traditional means such as machinery, field apps and sensors. The consequence? An overwhelming 73.5% of businesses are dedicating 11 or more hours weekly just for data collection, consolidation and analysis. Over a quarter (26.4%) are spending more than 16 hours per week. The power of accurate predictions: The survey emphasizes the weight placed by agribusinesses on accurate yield predictions. Such predictions are vital not only for on-farm decisions but also play pivotal roles in logistics, distribution, post-harvest processing and achieving the best pricing. Given the current state of data, the inaccurate predictions are posing significant risks throughout the supply chain. The impact of weather unpredictability: A significant 90.2% of agribusinesses acknowledge that climate change is affecting their crop yields, with 36.7% observing it makes yields highly unpredictable. The need for better, more accurate weather forecasting is evident, with nearly 80% of specialty crop respondents believing improved forecasts would enhance crop quality. Barriers and drivers for AgTech adoption: Several barriers to AgTech adoption persist, including connectivity issues, mistrust in digital technology and budget constraints. However, the urgency of various macro-economic and environmental factors, such as inflation, potential recessions and supply chain inconsistencies, are pushing agribusinesses toward more aggressive AgTech adoption. Notably, nearly 60.5% of respondents cite labor shortages, adding to the urgency. A glimpse into the future: The findings from the 2023 AgTech Trends research convey a tech-positive mindset. Agribusinesses are hopeful that the convergence of their various data sources into a unified platform and the adoption of modern technologies like AI will not just simplify data interpretation but revolutionize agriculture itself ]]> https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1675/smaller-and-medium-sized-markets-are-mostly-replenishing-inventories-in-2023-analysis.html https://agrospectrumasia.com/news/89/1675/smaller-and-medium-sized-markets-are-mostly-replenishing-inventories-in-2023-analysis.html Mon, 02 Jan 2023 10:56:45 +0530 A report summery of Global Major Agrochemical Market Inventory Survey An "inventory survey", investigating the global major agrochemical markets’ inventory status in 2023 has been published by the leading Agropages, with the purpose of make a clearer situation judgment in the critical period of recent months, through the inventory levels, stocked products, procurement plans and supply shortages in the major agrochemical markets.  Soaring or falling prices of bulk agri-inputs in the short term is not conducive to ensuring the stability of agricultural production. "Inventory" is undoubtedly one of the key factors affecting the market trend price fluctuations this year, and the speed of inventory reduction will also affect the market trend in the rest of this year and next year.  The samples are distributed in different countries from Europe, North America, Latin America, Asia to Africa, covering upstream and downstream enterprises such as manufacturers, trading companies, wholesalers, distributors, retailers and large growers. The product categories cover herbicides, fungicides, Insecticides, fertilizers and other types.  Moving forward to interpret the key inventory survey findings and connect the points behind the data. For example, higher inventory levels directly pressing on trading companies and wholesalers reflect market dynamics. Such contextual analysis intends to reveal the cause-effect relations and empower agribusinesses to navigate effectively, especially trading companies and manufacturers of overstocked herbicides facing current acute pressures. By logically considering through survey quantification, this report aims for readers to obtain an understanding of the global agrochemical market for critical decision-making. The comparation of inventory rate in different regions The data shows that Latin America and Asia (excluding China & India) facing greater inventory pressure with higher average inventory rates of 40-50% , while Southeast Asia, India, and Africa are around 30-40% on average currently. US and European respondents reported lower average inventory rates under 30%. Overstocked status The survey responses indicate the most overstocked agrochemical categories presently are herbicides and insecticides. Looking at the specific products, Glyphosate, Azoxystrobin and Abamectin have the highest number of mentions for being in excess. Inventory rates of different industry players Comparing the average inventory rate of different samples’ positions in the agrochemical industry, the Trading companies carry the highest at 47%, then Manufacturers and Wholesalers both at 38%. Trading companies and Wholesalers play a vital role linking upstream production to downstream markets; Keeping inventory levels in moderation to support sales but not tie up too much working capital is an ongoing balancing act for Trading companies and Wholesalers in agricultural inputs. However, there is also large gap between the maximum and minimum inventory level among companies in the same segments. Overview of Regional Procurement Plans The survey highlights that most companies in Latin America, Southeast Asia and India plan purchases on an as-needed basis for advance replenishing to meet in-season demand rather than pre-stocking excess volumes this year. There might be some procurement concentrated in Q1 2024, especially from February to March.  In summary, the overall inventory level is high this year; The stocked products are mainly herbicides, insecticides and fungicides. This year may only be a stage of replenishment, concentrated procurement is not expected for the rest of 2023. In comparison, companies in Asia and Latin America are more optimistic with relatively proactive procurement plans, expecting gradual improvement from February to March 2024. Those in North America and Europe are recovering slower due to inflation.  Entering 2024, the agricultural market is expected to restore gradually, driving agrochemical procurement recover to help reduce inventories. This suggests potential geographic, supply chain, or temporal mismatches between inventory buildups and agricultural demand ]]>