Question 2: What are the barriers to reaching scale with mobile agriculture information services and...

While the foundation of the CKW program is the human intermediary network due to its focus on the poorest and most marginalized farmers, we also see SMS, data, voice, USSD, SIMs and radio all as critical channels for delivering targeted, relevant and actionable information to as many farmers as possible, when and where they need it. We started by developing data-based applications for use by CKWs using Androids--which have the benefit of providing location data (a key to the value proposition for partners utilizing the CKW network for data collection), but have developed or are developing a number of other services targeting farmers who have access to their own phones, and who live too far from a CKW or other extension agent to receive personalized information on a frequent basis. The common denominator is the underlying content - which is leveraged by all of these channels.

 

While at first glance, it may seem that these other channels/apps could compete with CKWs, we believe the services are highly complementary, and see a number of factors that will keep CKWs highly relevant to the poorest farmers, even as mobile phone penetration increases in rural areas:

Personalized service:  CKWs see many farmers, deliver lots of information, and begin to see what works best in their own gardens, and for the farmers they are serving.  They become roaming “reference librarians” who can provide not only the scientific information, packaged to be easily understood, but also share highly localized tips that may be most likely to work for a farmer in their own service area.  As such, CKWs provide a very personalized service that is most relevant to the farmer.

Size of CKW service areas:  Another factor is the difference between CKWs’ ability to personally serve all 500-800 households in their service areas, and the level of mobile phone ownership, which today is ~10-15% in CKW-served communities.  Even if phone ownership in CKW areas reached 60% of farmers (2x the national average), the average CKW would still have over 175 registered households without phones to serve, vs. the average of 66 served today (this varies based on how long a CKW has been operational), so there are still be many farmers without phones who will need CKW services, not to mention the millions outside of CKW-served communities.

Difference in Pricing: Because farmers do not pay for CKW visits (partner organizations seeking to reach farmers with  agriculture information, or collect data via surveys, pay for CKWs to visit farmers) CKWs’ income is secure even if farmers begin using other mobile services.  A related question is why a farmer in a CKW district would use a fee-based mobile service if the CKW services are free.  The answer is that CKWs can only frequently serve a small % of the farmers in their service area.  Today, most CKWs only frequently serve the farmers within 1km of their home, though they officially serve a 5-10km area.   As such, farmers in the remaining 4-9km area need a service they can access more frequently, and for those that have a phone, an SMS, USSD, voice or other service is valuable for certain types of information.

Higher value activities for CKWs:  As mobile phone penetration increases, CKWs’ work will evolve to higher value activities, as GF provides opportunities both within our programs and elsewhere. This may include supporting services like mobile money, providing counterfeit seed identification, certification for fair trade goods, and supporting the distribution of inputs such as seed & fertilizers, etc. Given the level of experience CKWs are gaining, they will be sought after by many different entities in the agriculture sector. While this is beneficial from a sustainability standpoint, GF will play a strong role in ensuring that incentives remain squarely focused on serving smallholder farmers as the top priority.

 

To summarize, while I am a huge believer in the intermediary approach to delivering information, this is in the context of serving the poorest farmers.  There are millions of other farmers who have or will have access to mobile phones, and I believe that intermediated services go hand-in-hand with Direct-to-Farmer services