WSIS Action Line C7: E-Agriculture
8 Jul 2025 14:00h - 14:45h
WSIS Action Line C7: E-Agriculture
Session at a glance
Summary
This discussion was a panel session on advancing human-centered, inclusive, and sustainable digital solutions for transforming agri-food systems, held as part of the WSIS High-Level Meeting’s Action Line C7 e-Agriculture side event. The panel brought together experts from various organizations including IFAD, ITU, the Digital Public Goods Alliance, and Amini to discuss digital agriculture challenges and solutions.
Brenda Mulele Gunde from IFAD emphasized the importance of human-centered design in ICT4D projects, noting that local context matters significantly when implementing digital solutions for smallholder farmers across 50 countries. She highlighted the challenge of moving beyond pilot projects to achieve scalable solutions, stressing the need for inclusive approaches that intentionally address women and youth access to technology, as well as the importance of building national capacity and monitoring for impact rather than just adoption.
Aminata Amadou Garba from ITU addressed connectivity challenges, revealing that about one-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas having half the connectivity rates of urban areas. She advocated for integrated policy frameworks, open data initiatives, and practical training for smallholder farmers to bridge the digital divide.
Ricardo Miron Torres discussed digital public goods (DPGs) as open-source building blocks for creating adaptable agricultural solutions, emphasizing their role in democratizing access to technology and building sustainable digital public infrastructure. Clinton Oduor from Amini highlighted how AI and Earth observation can provide crucial environmental data for Africa’s agricultural sector, while identifying key barriers including connectivity issues, funding challenges, and regulatory ambiguity.
The session concluded with calls for increased investment in data infrastructure, capacity development, and intentional collaborative design focused on public good to ensure digital agriculture serves the 80% of food produced by smallholder farmers globally.
Keypoints
## Major Discussion Points:
– **Human-centered and context-specific digital agriculture solutions**: Panelists emphasized that technology must be designed with local contexts in mind, addressing the specific needs of smallholder farmers rather than implementing generic solutions. This includes understanding cultural dynamics, gender access issues, and ensuring solutions add real value to farming communities.
– **Infrastructure and connectivity challenges**: A persistent barrier to digital agriculture adoption is the lack of reliable, affordable internet connectivity in rural areas. Statistics show that only about one-third of people in least developed countries are connected, with rural areas having significantly lower connectivity rates than urban areas.
– **Digital Public Goods (DPGs) and open-source solutions**: The discussion highlighted the importance of open-source technologies, open data, and digital public infrastructure as foundational building blocks for scalable and sustainable digital agriculture solutions that can be adapted across different contexts without vendor lock-in.
– **Youth as agents of change and innovation**: Young people were identified as crucial catalysts for digital agriculture adoption, both as technology adopters who can bridge the gap with older farmers and as entrepreneurs developing innovative solutions. However, they face barriers including funding challenges and regulatory ambiguity.
– **Data accessibility and AI applications**: The critical need for accessible, quality data to power AI-driven agricultural solutions was emphasized, particularly using satellite imagery and Earth observation data to provide farmers with insights about their land, weather patterns, and crop conditions over time.
## Overall Purpose:
This was a WSIS (World Summit on the Information Society) side event focused on advancing human-centered, inclusive, development-oriented, and sustainable digital solutions for transforming agri-food systems. The discussion aimed to share lessons learned from implementing ICT4D projects in agriculture and explore how digital technologies can better serve smallholder farmers globally.
## Overall Tone:
The discussion maintained a professional, collaborative, and solution-oriented tone throughout. Panelists were pragmatic about challenges while remaining optimistic about potential solutions. The atmosphere was one of shared expertise and mutual learning, with speakers building on each other’s points and emphasizing the need for multi-stakeholder collaboration. The tone remained consistently focused on practical implementation and real-world impact rather than theoretical discussions.
Speakers
– **Paul Spiesberger**: Moderator from NGO ICT4D.at (Austrian chapter of the ICT4D movement)
– **Brenda Mulele Gunde**: Global Lead for ICT for Development at IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development), a specialized UN agency focusing on investments and partnerships for rural development and agricultural sector advancement
– **Aminata Amadou Garba**: Works at ITU with background in ICT infrastructure and policy
– **Ricardo Miron Torres**: Works with Digital Public Goods Alliance (DPGA), expertise in digital public goods and digital public infrastructure
– **Clinton Oduor**: Head of Data Science at Amini, working on Africa’s environmental data infrastructure using AI and Earth observation
– **Henry van Burgsteden**: Representative from FAO Office of Innovation (speaking on behalf of Director Vincent Martin)
– **Jimson Olufuye**: IT specialist based in Abuja, Nigeria (audience member who asked questions)
– **Audience**: Various audience members who participated in Q&A
Additional speakers:
– **Kathleen**: Engineer who participated in the Q&A session
Full session report
# Comprehensive Report: Advancing Human-Centred, Inclusive, and Sustainable Digital Solutions for Transforming Agri-Food Systems
## Executive Summary
This report presents a detailed analysis of a panel discussion held as part of the WSIS High-Level Meeting’s Action Line C7 e-Agriculture side event on the second day of the conference. The 45-minute session brought together leading experts from international development organisations, UN agencies, and technology companies to examine the challenges and opportunities in implementing digital agriculture solutions for smallholder farmers globally. The discussion, moderated by Paul Spiesberger from ICT4D.at (Austrian chapter of the ICT4D movement), featured comprehensive insights on human-centred design, connectivity challenges, digital public goods, and the critical role of youth in agricultural transformation.
The panel maintained a professional, collaborative, and solution-oriented tone throughout, with speakers demonstrating remarkable consensus on fundamental challenges whilst offering complementary perspectives on implementation approaches. Each panelist was allocated approximately 7 minutes for their presentation, followed by audience questions from online participants including Jimson Olufuye (IT specialist from Nigeria) and Kathleen (engineer). The session concluded with one-sentence recommendations from each panelist.
## Key Participants and Their Perspectives
### Brenda Mulele Gunde – IFAD Global Lead for ICT4D
Brenda Mulele Gunde provided extensive insights from IFAD’s experience implementing ICT4D projects across 50 countries, emphasising the critical importance of human-centred design in digital agriculture initiatives. Her contributions focused on the practical realities of working with smallholder farmers and the systemic barriers that prevent successful scaling of digital solutions.
Gunde highlighted that local context matters significantly when implementing digitalisation for agriculture, noting that different countries have varying priorities and challenges. She stressed that solutions must be adopted by smallholder farmers and add genuine value, rather than implementing technology for its own sake. A particularly striking observation concerned gender dynamics in technology access: “When it comes to accessing technology, they are not the first ones to be accessing technology. It’s usually the men that go for these trainings. They come home, and they don’t tell even the woman what they have been trained on. There’s one phone in the house, and the phone is accessed by the husband.”
Her analysis of pilot projects proved particularly thought-provoking: “We talk a lot about pilots being a double-edged sword. What I mean is sometimes you can pilot a solution for maybe 10,000 to 50 or 2,000 to 10,000 farmers, but it gets stuck in the pilot, it does not get to scale.” She argued that the pathway to scaling must be clear from the start, before beginning pilot implementation.
Gunde provided specific examples from IFAD’s work, including a Rwanda dairy value chain project and the use of soil sensors for pH levels and irrigation. She emphasised the transformative potential of youth in digital agriculture, noting that young people understand technology quickly and can help older farmers adapt to new solutions whilst providing extension advisory services as entrepreneurs. Her final recommendation emphasised that “80% of the food is produced by smallholder farmers, so we need to make sure that digital agriculture enables them to commercialise and increase their income.”
### Aminata Amadou Garba – ITU Infrastructure and Policy Expert
Aminata Amadou Garba addressed the fundamental connectivity challenges that underpin digital agriculture implementation, providing crucial statistics that frame the scope of the digital divide. Her presentation revealed that approximately one-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas experiencing connectivity rates that are half those of urban areas.
Garba advocated for integrated policy frameworks and emphasised that private sector telecommunications providers require financial incentives to connect remote areas with sparse populations. She highlighted the existence of universal access funds that often remain undeployed due to implementation challenges, representing a significant missed opportunity for rural connectivity improvement.
Her approach to addressing digital agriculture challenges emphasised the need for open data initiatives and practical training for smallholder farmers. Garba argued that open data and open APIs are essential to enable local innovators to contextualise solutions for their specific environments. She also stressed that capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities is essential for digital solutions to improve socio-economic benefits.
### Ricardo Miron Torres – Digital Public Goods Alliance
Ricardo Miron Torres brought a unique perspective on digital public goods (DPGs) as foundational building blocks for sustainable agricultural solutions. His contributions focused on the technical and philosophical distinctions between merely open-source solutions and true digital public goods that can democratise access to technology.
Torres explained that digital public goods are designed with human-centred principles and can be adapted to local contexts, enabling reusable solutions across different places without reinventing the wheel. He made an important technical distinction: “The difference between just open source and digital public goods is also that they are designed for privacy, that they use open standards and best practices for interoperability… if the underlying components to access that solution is not open, then you might risk being vendor locked in or have security risks that you might not know of.”
Torres mentioned the “Reboot the Earth” community launched by DPGA and FAO, and suggested practical solutions such as using SMS services to deliver AI-powered solutions in low connectivity areas. His vision for digital agriculture emphasised that digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups, moving beyond reliance on large corporations to create more distributed innovation networks.
### Clinton Oduor – Amini Head of Data Science
Clinton Oduor provided crucial insights into the data infrastructure challenges facing African agriculture, combining technical expertise in AI and Earth observation with practical experience in environmental data systems. His contributions highlighted the paradox that Africa holds approximately 65% of the world’s uncultivated arable land whilst being the most data-scarce continent globally.
Oduor emphasised that investment in data and creating visibility into agri-food ecosystems is essential before implementing AI solutions. He argued that AI and Earth observation solutions must provide visibility into what’s happening on farms to enable informed decision-making, but noted that the fundamental challenge is the lack of accessible, quality data to power such systems.
His analysis identified three primary barriers to digital agriculture implementation: connectivity issues requiring reliable, affordable, high-bandwidth connections; funding challenges particularly affecting youth-led startups that don’t fit current venture capital investment models; and regulatory ambiguity around data privacy and cross-border data sharing.
Oduor also provided important insights into youth innovation, noting that young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations. He mentioned his involvement with TinyML4D Kenya and emphasised the need for better funding mechanisms for youth-led agricultural technology innovations.
### Henry van Burgsteden – Speaking for FAO Director Vincent Martin
Henry van Burgsteden delivered closing remarks on behalf of Vincent Martin, FAO Director, who experienced technical difficulties connecting to the session. His brief contribution highlighted FAO’s practical achievements, including their Digital Services Portfolio and FLAB app winning WSIS Champions Awards.
Van Burgsteden noted that FAO has supported 15 digital initiatives toward digital public goods certification, with eight already certified. He emphasised FAO’s commitment to developing a digital agriculture and AI innovation roadmap to guide inclusive and scalable transformation.
## Major Thematic Areas and Key Insights
### Human-Centred Design and Local Context
The panel demonstrated strong consensus on the fundamental importance of human-centred design in digital agriculture implementation. All speakers agreed that local context matters significantly when implementing digitalisation for agriculture, as different countries have different priorities and challenges. This consensus emerged from practical experience across multiple contexts, with speakers emphasising that solutions must be adopted by smallholder farmers and add genuine value rather than implementing technology for its own sake.
### Infrastructure and Connectivity Challenges
Connectivity emerged as a fundamental barrier to inclusive digital agriculture, with speakers providing complementary perspectives on the scope and nature of these challenges. The discussion revealed that one-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas having half the connectivity rates of urban areas. Speakers agreed that connectivity must be reliable, affordable, and high-quality to be effective, requiring policy frameworks and financial incentives for private sector telecommunications providers.
### Digital Public Goods and Open-Source Solutions
The discussion revealed strong support for digital public goods and open-source approaches, with important technical nuances about privacy design, open standards, and interoperability best practices. Multiple speakers supported the principle that open data and open APIs are needed to enable local innovators to contextualise solutions, emphasising data accessibility as critical for innovation.
### Youth as Agents of Change and Innovation
The panel demonstrated unanimous recognition of youth as crucial agents of change in digital agriculture. Speakers emphasised youth as both technology adoption facilitators who can bridge gaps between advanced solutions and traditional farming practices, and as innovators and entrepreneurs facing systemic barriers including funding challenges where youth-led startups don’t fit current venture capital investment models.
### Data Accessibility and AI Applications
Data accessibility emerged as a critical foundation for digital agriculture innovation, with all speakers acknowledging its importance. The discussion highlighted that Africa holds 65% of uncultivated arable land whilst being the most data-scarce continent, emphasising that investment in data and creating visibility into agri-food ecosystems is essential before implementing AI solutions.
## Audience Questions and Responses
### Universal Access Fund Deployment
Jimson Olufuye, an IT specialist from Nigeria, raised an important question about universal access funds that have been “sitting unused in banks for years” in African countries. This highlighted a critical policy and implementation gap where available funding mechanisms remain underutilised due to bureaucratic and implementation barriers.
### Low-Cost Sensor Technology
Kathleen, an engineer, asked about wireless sensory nodes costing around one cent distributed via planes or drones. The panel acknowledged the potential of low-cost sensor solutions whilst emphasising the need for context-sensitive data collection mechanisms that farmers can actually use and maintain.
## Final Recommendations from Panelists
Each panelist provided a one-sentence final recommendation:
– **Brenda Mulele Gunde**: Emphasised that 80% of food is produced by smallholder farmers, so digital agriculture must enable them to commercialise and increase their income.
– **Aminata Amadou Garba**: Stressed the need for continued investment in connectivity infrastructure and capacity development.
– **Ricardo Miron Torres**: Advocated for building sustainable digital public infrastructure through collaborative partnerships.
– **Clinton Oduor**: Highlighted the importance of addressing data infrastructure gaps before implementing advanced AI solutions.
– **Henry van Burgsteden**: Reinforced FAO’s commitment to supporting digital public goods certification and inclusive innovation roadmaps.
## Conclusion
The panel discussion revealed a sophisticated understanding of digital agriculture challenges and opportunities, with speakers demonstrating remarkable consensus on fundamental issues whilst offering complementary approaches to implementation. The high level of agreement on core challenges – including connectivity barriers, the need for human-centred design, data accessibility requirements, and youth engagement importance – suggests strong potential for coordinated action across different sectors and stakeholder groups.
Key insights about gender barriers in technology access, the limitations of pilot projects that fail to scale, technical distinctions between open-source and digital public goods, and Africa’s data paradox provided crucial context for understanding implementation challenges. The panel’s emphasis on building sustainable digital public infrastructure, supporting youth innovation, ensuring inclusive access, and monitoring for real impact provides a comprehensive framework for advancing human-centred, inclusive, and sustainable digital solutions for transforming agri-food systems.
The discussion contributes to a growing understanding that digital agriculture success depends not just on technology deployment but on building ecosystems that support local innovation, ensure equitable access, and create sustainable pathways for smallholder farmer prosperity. This holistic approach offers promising directions for achieving the transformative potential of digital agriculture whilst ensuring that solutions serve the smallholder farmers who produce the majority of the world’s food.
Session transcript
Paul Spiesberger: Welcome and bienvenue on the second day of the WSIS High-Level Meeting. My name is Paul Spiesberger. I have the pleasure and the honor today of moderating this wonderful panel. I am from the NGO called ICT4D.at, so we are the Austrian chapter of the ICT4D movement. You are hopefully here for the WSIS Action Line C7 e-Agriculture side event with the title Advancing Human-Centered, Inclusive, Development-Orientated and Sustainable Digital Solutions for Transforming Agri-Food Systems. When I went through the list of panelists, I was quite impressed with the background and if I would not try to summarize their impressive backgrounds, I would definitely not do justice to their CVs, so I rather take the 45 minutes to give them the stage to share their expertise with us, which I think is much more interesting than me now reading out a lot of CV data. But you can trust me, they have a lot to share and I’m very happy to be the moderator today. So I kindly maybe ask you when I give you the floor to speak to also very briefly introduce yourself and maybe with one or two sentences share with us what you’re currently burning for while you’re sitting here and what is the most important thing you currently think should be shared with the WSIS Forum and everyone here. And with that, I would also like to welcome everyone online, hello. If you have any questions, I hope we will have some time at the end, please share them also in the chat and also within here I would like to then hopefully at the end invite you to participate in it. So, with no further ado, I would like to hand over to our online participant, Dr. Martin from the FAO, to give us some opening remarks, and if the technicians are working, we should hear and see him hopefully soon. Mr. Martin, can you hear us, are you online? Hello, this is Henry here from FAO, our director is still connecting, so he should be online any minute now. Apologies for the delay. No worries, but I would then propose to move forward, because otherwise we run out of time, or should we quickly? No, we don’t wait. All right, well then, I would then propose to start with our first speaker in the panel, and when Dr. Martin comes online, he can then share his opening remarks. If this is okay. Angelique, the boss, is okay? Good, I got to go. All right, so, our first speaker, Brenda, is, I have to rephrase the question a little bit, because we were supposed to have a speaker before, but the FAO Office of Innovation, one second, so, Brenda comes from the FAO Office, and the focus on innovation, and on how human-centered and inclusive approach has extended digital tools to even the most remote farming communities. In this context, could you share with us the key lessons IFAD has learned from implementing ICT4D projects that could help shape the future digital agriculture strategies and approaches to flourish? You’ve got seven minutes in total.
Brenda Mulele Gunde: Thank you so much. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Brenda Mulele Gunde. I’m a Global Lead for ICT for Development for IFAD. It’s a specialized agency under the United Nations where we look at investments and partnerships with public sector but also private sector to support road development but also looking at the advancement of the agricultural sector. So going to the question that you’ve asked for, human-centered design is a critical element of some of the projects that we implement, especially when it comes to digitalization for agriculture. We work with different contexts and different countries, 50 countries around the globe, meaning that those 50 countries also have different contexts, they have different, you know, priorities, they have different challenges that they’re dealing with. Although challenges sometimes might be similar, one country over another because maybe they share a border or they share trade, but local context matters when it comes to digitalization and innovation. Because technologies can be developed and designed for the greater masses, but when it comes to adoption and working with rural smallholder farmers, we really have to look at the context to make sure that one, the solution can be adopted, can be adopted by the smallholder farmers, it makes sense to the smallholder farmers. Secondly, it also adds value because if you’re looking at only ensuring that we implement technology for the sake of it, because we have the investments, we have the financing, we have the partnership, it may be those elephants that we see technologies that are there, you know, they work two, three years and then they don’t work anymore. The other aspect is that we talk a lot about pilots being a double-edged sword. What I mean is sometimes you can pilot a solution for maybe 10,000 to 50 or 2,000 to 10,000 farmers, but it gets stuck in the pilot, it does not get to scale. So, at the same time, pilots are also important because pilots help us to understand in terms of what are some of the local challenges that you need to deal with, what are some of the things that you need to ensure that as you go to scale, you have addressed those elements. So, it’s a double-edged sword, but it’s actually important. Pilots are essential, but the pathway to scaling up has to be clear from the start, before you start the pilot. How are you going to scale the innovation so that you reach more masses? The other part that we have talked about also, as I talk about pilot, we’ve done a lot of AI-based pilots, both from operations, but also in terms of our internal systems. What we have seen so far is that they have to be inclusive. They have to address also the needs of other beneficiaries, and they have to be intentional because it’s not often that we see women and youth being able to access technologies. When it comes to working in the field, you find that most of the countries that I’ve been to, the bigger number of farmers are actually women. They’re the ones who go into the field. They’re the ones who are also working on nutrition. But when it comes to accessing technology, they are not the first ones to be accessing technology. It’s usually the men that go for these trainings. They come home, and they don’t tell even the woman what they have been trained on. There’s one phone in the house, and the phone is accessed by the husband. If the husband doesn’t leave the phone, if extending extension advisory, nobody also has it. All those dynamics that we’re dealing with are part of human-centered designing. Then we’re looking at national capacity. Why are we talking about national capacity? As IFAD, we work in the public sector. We provide investments to governments, meaning that we also need to look at scalability and sustainability of these solutions. Solutions are designed by the private sector. Most of the private sector are the ones that innovate and develop these solutions. When it comes to implementation, we implement through public Sector. So we also need to ensure that public sector systems are strengthened. in a way that builds capacity over project management units so that can be abled to be implemented. And also looking into greater issues, the policy environment, enabling the environment for implementation. The last one is about monitoring for impact. It is easy to monitor for adoption. Looking at how many farmers have access, but what is the impact? is a critical element when it comes to development of solutions. So how is that farmer data available for private sector and public sector? And that data is available to be used for innovation. The last part is on youth. I think youth as agents of change. We’ve seen a lot of solutions, especially in agriculture, that are meant to support farmers. But when it comes to adoption and helping farmers to adapt, it’s the young people that, because they understand technology quickly, they’re able to work with the older generation farmers to explain the technology. And they’re also willing to do this as an entrepreneurship. So meaning that, for example, extension advisory, I’ve seen that in the daily value chain, where young people are providing, for example, extension advisory to farmers. And then they’re also supporting farmers to be able to adopt technology. So all these elements have to work in unison, designing for the user, but also, at the same time, driving for sustainability and scalability. Thanks.
Paul Spiesberger: Thank you, Brenda. I very much appreciate the demand-driven approach you take and really listen first to the user when you actually start working for them. And with that, I would like to ask a question to Aminata. In the same context, based on your experience at ITU and your background in ICT infrastructure and policy, how can we address the persistent challenge of connectivity, affordability, and digital literacy to ensure that inclusive digital agriculture becomes a reality, especially for smallholder farmers in underserved regions? The floor is yours.
Aminata Amadou Garba: Thank you. So maybe quickly, I will tackle the aspect of connectivity and then a little bit of technology in agriculture. If we look at the statistics now, the latest statistics by ITU related to connectivity, we have about one third of the population which is unconnected, about 30%. But when we go down to the least developed countries, you actually have about one-third that is connected. No,w when we look at the difference between the urban and rural areas, you have twice as many people connected if you are in an urban area, than if you are in rural. So what that tells us is that who is in rural areas are small farmers, and most of these people are not connected. Not even ¼ of them, and when they are connected, they do have the necessary skill to use that technology and advance their daily activity. which can be developed in order to improve the efficiency of the agricultural system and then to allow more people to have access to those technologies. One important point is if we look at the least developed countries, agriculture is the first priority economic sector because it is the sector, most of them, if not all of them. And yet, this gap between connectivity and skills is preventing the achievement of the potential of agriculture in these countries. And i think the solutions are there, there have been many solution that have been created by third parties. For example, that will provide the solution and then provide E agriculture as a service. In that case, they may not be adapted, they may not be scalable for what needs to be done. And therefore, I think one key, and I will jump maybe a little bit to the second part of the question, is that the need to have a framework, a strategy, and a policy framework, sectoral one, which is integrated within the national framework and the national policy, and looking into what are the impacts of the technology. How can we integrate technology? And the other solution, I think, is that most of the e-agricultural solutions are based on data. Today, when we look at it, they are based on AI, and data is key to have those solutions adapted. And data yet is not available, and Brenda just mentioned it. The lack of data sometimes, or the non-accessibility, not necessarily the lack of data, but the non-accessibility of data for the innovator, the local innovator or the new innovator who need to contextualize the solution, I think is key. And a solution will be having those open data, open API, which strategies but also policies which will enable this to be a reality. And focusing on local innovation, focusing on this training on the ground, a really small scale, we don’t need to have a degree in engineering to apply agricultural solution, but this practical training on the ground for those smallholder farmers, I think is important. So I think I will stay here and maybe I’ll complete this later. All right, thank you very much.
Paul Spiesberger: With this, I would like to go to our next speaker. Ricardo, how can digital public goods or short DPGs be leveraged to ensure equitable access to digital architecture tools for smallholder farmers, especially in rural areas where persistent challenges such as limited connectivity, low digital literacy and affordability of technologies continue to hinder inclusive development?
Ricardo Miron Torres: Thanks, Paul. And good afternoon, everyone. Maybe I’ll start by explaining what are digital public goods to begin with. These are open source technologies that are designed with certain principles in mind. And it’s not only software, but as Aminat already mentioned, data, content and other critical technology pieces used to build the digital infrastructure. And at the heart of global development is, of course, the backbone of our food systems. So we must ensure that these food systems are not left behind in the digitization of the world. And DPGs could serve as these building blocks to create solutions that are adaptable and adaptable, especially in local context, as Brenda already mentioned, being designed with human centers is a very important aspect of it. And also, just to maybe put what’s the difference between DPGs, open source and public interest technology, is that DPGs are designed for simplicity and could be implemented with this local context in mind, which is very important. And for example, alongside FAO, the DPGA launched Reboot the Earth, which is a community of innovators that helped the development of climate and agriculture solutions. And one of the projects that came out and one of the things that I learned was the access to information was a critical need for small farmers and agriculture. So using open satellite images and data, as long as other software technologies like AI, one of the solutions that was developed was this specific AI model that helped farmers do precision agriculture based on the specific needs of the land and the region they were working in. And this was only possible thanks to these open technologies, but adapted and delivered through an SMS services, which is critical for those low connectivity areas you were talking about. So adapting these solutions and make them reusable across different places is very important, not to reinvent the wheel, but to tailor those. And for this being open source is very important because that means that the developers and the communities building these solutions have access to adapt these technologies and they do not have to start from scratch. Because as we know, Both funding and time is very limited for these very critical issues. And then it’s not only about the accessibility, but also about democratizing the access to them. So the difference between just open source and digital public goods is also that they are designed for privacy, that they use open standards and best practices for interoperability. And also something very important, that’s platform independence and forgive me if I get a little bit too technical here, but the solution could be open source or the data could be open source. But if the underlying components to access that solution is not open, then you might risk being a vendor locked in or have security risks that you might not know of. And one example of this could be Google Maps. Google Maps is a very useful tool. I use it to get here today. But let’s say that a small farmer needs information about a specific area where they work on. They would probably not be able to use Google Maps because the incentives on how that data was collected on gather are for financial purposes. So there’s not enough data in rural areas, for example, in many countries. And this is why relying on certain services needs to be done on open data and be made available as digital public goods. And then the other part of the conversation is the sustainability of these digital solutions that Brenda was also alluding to with these pilots. And this is also why we need to build digital public infrastructure. But I’ll leave that maybe for the second part of this. So especially when considering the long term vision of building resilient digital ecosystems, and more specifically in the agriculture sector, how can these DPI and DPG serve? as foundational enablers for innovation, public-private collaboration and sustainable service delivery, especially in regions, again, where infrastructure and institutional capacity building challenges remain substantial. Sorry, I talked a little bit about these building blocks, which are the technologies, the digital public goods, and in order to implement a long-term vision for a resilient digital agricultural infrastructure, this needs to be a long-term vision. And this is some of the terms that we hear around DPGs and DPI. And while DPGs are the building blocks, DPI is more of an approach on how you implement this technology and the governance mechanisms and the security mechanisms for this. And one of the key aspects of this is that it’s public, so it needs to be for the public benefit. Some of the foundational layers are things like digital identity, digital payments, data exchange. And we know that for small farmers, having access to a formal identity and financial services is critical for the development and success that they would have. So having a verifiable and accessible digital correlation could enable things like opening bank accounts, having microloans or just receiving direct compensation for the products and services that they produce. And this is not only about the government taking all of the action on building these infrastructure layers. It’s providing the infrastructure, so also there could be public and private partnerships, for example, which would enable local ecosystem, local players and startups to also act and access these markets because it lowers the barrier. So in a way that not only big corporations are the ones that are available to access to these digital infrastructure layers. And of course, one of the best ways to build this digital public infrastructure for agriculture is through open source and digital public goods, not only because of the benefits of cost or licensing, but also because a matter of sovereignty and having ownership not only by the government, but by the society and people that use and benefit these solutions. And that’s why I think it’s very important that these solutions are accessible, but also governed in a way where it’s collaborative. And that’s also managed in a sustainable way in a long term plan.
Paul Spiesberger: Wonderful, I’m really pleased that Aminata before shared with us that the ITU doesn’t just stop by connecting people, but she’s going much further by building up skills, but also with the policymaking and also with this focus on this open data, open source and so on. And I think there’s a lot of synergies with Ricardo just shared with us that with the focus on partnerships, private sector, but also like UN bodies and also the community, which I see the open source movement a lot involved as well, play a pivotal role in e-agriculture. And I think with this, we come to you, Clinton. Your work at Amini leverages AI and Earth observation to address environmental challenges. In what ways can youth-led startups like yours contribute more effectively to building climate resilient and data-driven agri-food systems in Africa and beyond, while advancing human-centered, inclusive, development-orientated and sustainable digital solutions for agri-food systems?
Clinton Oduor: Thank you. I hope you can all hear me. So my name is Clinton Oduor. I’m the head of data science at Atamini. So Atamini, we are building Africa’s environmental data infrastructure, of course, starting with Africa, but with a goal of spreading all across the global south. So the platform is a data platform that aggregates environmental data from multiple sources, be it satellite imagery to track like how the earth is changing over time. And that can mean like how farmlands are changing over time. So the good thing about earth observation and satellites specifically is that we have settlers that have been orbiting the earth for the past like 30 years. So beyond just like having a state of what’s happening in our farmland or the current state, we can also get an understanding of what has been happening on those particular farms, let’s say over the last 30 years. And that can be really important because like they can be used to make like some informed decision. So if you look generally at Africa currently, Africa holds about 65% thereabouts of the world’s uncultivated area that can be cultivated. But again, it’s the most data-scarce continent in the world, meaning that we don’t have visibility of what’s happening, for example, for the farmlands. So it’s still more than 60% of the farms there are also smallholder farmers. So we need to have like some sort of visibility of what’s happening in the farms. What are they doing? Like what are the dangers that might be forecasted? For example, are the farms experiencing things such as water stress? Are they experiencing like infestation by pests and diseases and things of the sort? So if we have this visibility, if we have this information, it’s going to unlock like quite a lot of opportunities. The first one Of course, the farmers will have the necessary information at hand to make decisions during the planting of the crops. So there’s quite a lot of opportunities that can emerge when we have like a visibility in the entire agri-food system. And I think AI and Earth Observation is one of the few technologies that provides us that platform, yeah.
Paul Spiesberger: So you talked about the positive aspects, but drawing from your experience with Armenian grassroots communities like TinyML and Kenya, what are the most pressuring barriers for young innovators such as you are facing in scaling digital agriculture solutions in rural areas and what support ecosystems are needed to overcome them?
Clinton Oduor: Yeah, I think most of these challenges already been talked about by my colleagues. And of course, like the main one is around digital infrastructure and connectivity to be specific. We can’t talk about digital agriculture when we cannot connect to the farmers themselves or the people who need that information. And as my colleague said here that, for example, in the developing world, the trends usually shift from a third to two thirds who lack the connectivity. So I think that’s something that needs to be addressed. And when we say connectivity, it’s not just connectivity on internet for the sake of, but it needs to be number one, reliable. It needs to be affordable and it also need to be high bandwidth so that it can open more opportunities to other farmers themselves. So of course, the second one is what many startups or around the Global South Asia Affairs around funding. I think the youth-grown innovation that’s coming around food agri-tech companies that are emerging, most of them are usually not yet fit to the current VC bucket of companies to invest in. So we should also see how we can elevate that. or find like other funding mechanisms to make sure that these innovations are seen from the ideation stage to the implementation stage. Because like a quite a lot of them are usually like a very promising but they never go beyond the ideation stage. And of course the last one is around the ambiguity around regulation and policy. So they quite a lot of disconnect between like what young people perceive to as regulation. So for example, most young people usually think that our regulation is there maybe not to make like innovation go forward but most of the time that’s surely not the case. So we also need to build like some capacity around like the importance of regulation and this include like things such as data privacy. For example, if you collect like a satellite data of a particular farm and you have that information for the past 30 years, what does that mean at a privacy point of view? It could also be something like the regulations around how we transfer our shared data between like our boundaries which is still like a very huge problem today. Yeah, thank you. Wonderful.
Paul Spiesberger: Thank you very much. I very much like that your startup is not only predicting the future with the weather forecast but you do AI time traveling back around 30 years. It’s pretty impressive. With this, we have some time left around 10 minutes to open the floor. And as you can see, we have here a quite distinguished panel of experts and I hope you have some questions for them and we have a debate. So we have two first questions here, please.
Jimson Olufuye: Yeah, it’s excellent panel we have here. Very interesting topic. My name is Jim Sindulfuye. I’m an IT specialist based in Abuja, Nigeria. Listening carefully to Brenda, Renata. and Ricardo and everybody, Clinton as well. I want to find out, you may emphasize inclusivity, okay? So how do you ensure that all stakeholders are inclusive, are included in the project? Okay, we have some methodology like sandboxes, maybe regulatory, operational, hybrid. Have you considered any of these around this because you emphasize inclusivity a lot. And then Aminata, like the productivity is very important. Okay, so how do we get people to have access? Because you need to know, how do you emphasize the issue for the capacity development, how do we get capacity? We’ve been talking about this for so long, and Ricardo talking about data. How do you get the data? It was mentioned that there was no, we can’t even get data. Can universal cyber provision fund help in this way? Because as an African, I’m concerned, how do we bridge the gap and fast track productivity? Thank you.
Brenda Mulele Gunde: Okay, let me start addressing the issue of inclusivity. I think when I was talking about inclusivity, it’s not just about that women, youth access the technologies. You’ve talked about how do we get all the other stakeholders involved? I think as the way we implement our projects, when it comes to the actual deployment of these solutions, before you even talk about, let’s go to the field and start collecting farmer data, registering farmers and getting this solution, it’s about bringing the rest of the other value chain actors on the same table. I’ll give an example, we’re doing a project in Rwanda. It’s for the daily value chain, it’s for milk production. So we’re looking at milk production, you’re looking at from the production from the farmer to the off taking. So you have a producer and a processor on the other side. and the actors in between. The actors that are collecting the milk, there are people that are actually selling the milk, there are actors that are looking at the quality of milk, then you’ve got government. So all these players have to be on the same table, understand what do we mean when you say we are digitizing the value chain across. What is the role each of these players are going to play? If there’s going to be farmer data, who is managing this data? Who is collecting this data? How is it going to be available? So all those questions are being asked through what we call ourselves, we call this startup project. So every point before it starts, we sit on the table and narrate all these issues so that you’re able to address them. And that’s how you get all the actors included. So that way you’re not just dealing with the women and youth inclusivity, but you’re also dealing with the actors ecosystem inclusivity. I hope that answers your question.
Aminata Amadou Garba: Let me maybe jump in related to the accessibility, the connectivity, how do we get people connected? As you mentioned, yes, I agree with you having the universal access can help. But we have seen that there has been an issue a little bit with the universal access in a lot of African countries where this fund has been sitting for years in the bank, but it has not been deployed. And when you look at the market of the telecommunication, the service providers are private sector. So they put the infrastructure in place, they put a lot of money to get that infrastructure in place, and they want to return to investments. So I take it as example, I’m from Niger, is a very vast country. And in the big North, you have to go thousands of kilometers to go and connect to those places. And yet you have a very few people in those regions. So if I am a private sector, I will just say, well, financially, it doesn’t make sense for me to go. I cannot put that much money and then not get enough people connected. That is when policies come.
Audience: Hello, my name is Kathleen. I’m an engineer. First of all, before giving my question, I want to congratulate you on how you described the problems and solutions that you came up with, because being an engineer, I do not speak diplomacy. In most of the panels, I struggle to understand something or where they are going, what they’re doing. Okay. Okay. Okay. Now I forgot my question. Okay. There are some technical solutions where they use some sensory nodes, a wireless sensory node that costs one cent or something like that. And I’m curious, and they use a plane to distribute the nodes. And I think that can be adapted with some drones, which are more cost effective. My question is, if you have any idea if in these communities, such a solution has been approached? Only one person, please answer. We don’t have time.
Aminata Amadou Garba: Okay, let me try to respond. I think for the soil sensors, I know soil sensors where we, on a horticulture project, where we use soil sensors to check the pH levels of the soil, but also to help farmers on precision mechanism for them to know when do they irrigate, how much do they irrigate. And these are, like you said, they’re low costs, but also at the same time, they have to be applied within the context that farmers can be able to use them. But they’re also some, they’re low cost, but they’re not…they don’t have data collection mechanisms.
Paul Spiesberger: Thank you, thank you very much. I have to be very strict. I would like to ask Henry for his closing remarks, if he’s still online and can hear us.
Henry van Burgsteden: Thank you very much. Yes, I’m here. Dear colleagues, partners and friends, on behalf of Vincent Martin, the Director of the FOWL Office of Innovation, I would like to sincerely thank you for attending this side event on the WSIS Action Line C7 e-Agriculture as part of the WSIS Plus20 Forum. Today, we reflected on two decades of progress and look forward to shaping a more inclusive, sustainable digital future for agri-food systems. Over the last 20 years, under FAO’s leadership and with strong partnerships, this action line has evolved from promoting basic ICTs to enabling cutting-edge innovations, for example, AI, geospatial tools, automated agriculture and digital public goods. These have empowered smallholder farmers, youth and rural communities globally. Initiatives like the e-Agriculture Community of Practice, the Digital Villages Initiative and the Global Network of Digital Agriculture Innovation Hubs show the power of human-centered digital ecosystems to drive food security, climate resilience and rural development. FAO, in partnership with ITU, also developed the e-Agriculture Strategy Guide, now used by 18 countries to shape their national digital agriculture strategies. ensuring local ownership and advancing climate smart agriculture. Together, FVO and ITU have also published the Agriculture in Action series, one on AI, another one on drones, blockchain, and more, providing practical guidance and policy support for digital innovation. But despite the progress, challenges persist. We heard many of the challenges today during the panel discussion. Limited infrastructure, connectivity, and digital literacy are still hindering access, especially in rural areas. And this is where digital public infrastructure and digital public goods play a critical role. FVO has already supported 15 digital initiatives towards DPG certification, with eight certified, including the Digital Services Portfolio, recognized last year during the WSIS 2024 Champions Award. And in 2025, we’re very happy that the FVO food loss app, shortly called FLAB, earned the same honor, highlighting innovation that drives sustainability and informed decision making. And a recent FAO DPI webinar emphasized that digital transformation must go beyond just technology, ensuring inclusion, equity, and alignment with those most at risk of being left behind. In that spirit, we are now developing a digital agriculture and AI innovation roadmap to guide inclusive and scalable transformation. And this roadmap aims to foster inclusive, scalable, interoperable, and context-sensitive digital ecosystems that support a sustainable transformation of agri-food systems. As we move forward, digital agriculture must align with broader development goals and the 2030 agenda. But that requires strong governance, inclusive policies, and multi-stakeholder partnerships. with people at the center. This session provided reflections but also calls for the continuation of co-creation and action for a future where digital agriculture is not only smart but is inclusive, affordable and sustainable. Thank you very much.
Paul Spiesberger: Thank you very much from the Senior Innovation Office of the FAO. With this we are one minute over but I thought of giving the panel one last time to say one sentence they would like to tell to the WSIS community of the future and how to move forward and how agriculture plays a role in the future of WSIS. We start with you. One sentence.
Clinton Oduor: Okay so my one sentence will be I think we need to invest in data and creating like a visibility into like the general like agri-food ecosystems. We talk about a lot of AI but there won’t be any AI without data so we really need to invest in data first. Thank you.
Brenda Mulele Gunde: Yeah my one sentence is the food that we eat is produced by 80% of smallholder farmers so our solutions need to address the needs of smallholder farmers to move them from just feeding themselves but also that they can be able to commercialize and increase their income.
Aminata Amadou Garba: I think my sentence will be to emphasize capacity developments for the smallholder farmers and then the community at large so that the digital will be used to improve the socio-economic benefits.
Ricardo Miron Torres: I think the path to equitable and resilient digital agriculture is not about technology it’s actually about intentional design collaboration and being just committed to the public good.
Paul Spiesberger: All right thank you very much. I’d like to take the opportunity to also thank our tech team. They did a wonderful job. and thank everyone who participated online and please join me with a round of applause for our panel and everyone else participated. Thank you. We would like to take a group vote if we can do that. Where should we should we place here? Do we still have time or do people want to move in? Did we still have time for group vote? Okay. Could you all line up in the in the front of the screen so we take a quick picture? Thank you very much. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Brenda Mulele Gunde
Speech speed
182 words per minute
Speech length
1298 words
Speech time
427 seconds
Local context matters when implementing digitalization for agriculture, as different countries have different priorities and challenges
Explanation
Brenda emphasizes that while IFAD works with 50 countries globally, each has different contexts, priorities, and challenges. Although some challenges might be similar between neighboring countries due to shared borders or trade, local context is crucial for successful technology adoption and implementation.
Evidence
IFAD works with 50 countries around the globe, and although challenges sometimes might be similar between countries that share borders or trade, local context matters for adoption by smallholder farmers
Major discussion point
Human-Centered Design and Local Context in Digital Agriculture
Topics
Development | Economic | Infrastructure
Agreed with
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Agreed on
Local context and human-centered design are essential for successful digital agriculture implementation
Solutions must be adopted by smallholder farmers and add value, not just implement technology for the sake of it
Explanation
Brenda argues that technology should be implemented because it makes sense to smallholder farmers and adds real value, not simply because funding and partnerships are available. Without this approach, technologies become ‘elephants’ that work for 2-3 years and then fail.
Evidence
Technologies that don’t add value become ‘elephants’ that work two, three years and then don’t work anymore
Major discussion point
Human-Centered Design and Local Context in Digital Agriculture
Topics
Development | Economic | Sustainable development
Agreed with
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Agreed on
Local context and human-centered design are essential for successful digital agriculture implementation
Pilots are important but often get stuck without clear pathways to scaling from the start
Explanation
Brenda describes pilots as a ‘double-edged sword’ – they help understand local challenges and what needs to be addressed for scaling, but often remain stuck at the pilot stage without reaching more farmers. She emphasizes that the pathway to scaling must be clear before starting the pilot.
Evidence
Pilots can work with 10,000 to 50,000 or 2,000 to 10,000 farmers but get stuck in the pilot phase without scaling
Major discussion point
Scaling and Sustainability of Digital Solutions
Topics
Development | Economic | Digital business models
Agreed with
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Agreed on
Scaling digital solutions from pilot to implementation requires intentional planning and clear pathways
Disagreed with
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Disagreed on
Approach to technology implementation – pilots vs systematic infrastructure
Women farmers often cannot access technology despite being the majority of farmers in many countries
Explanation
Brenda points out that in most countries she’s visited, women make up the majority of farmers and work in the fields, yet they are not the first to access technology training. Men typically attend trainings and may not share the knowledge, and household phone access is often controlled by husbands.
Evidence
In most countries visited, women are the bigger number of farmers who go into the field and work on nutrition, but men go for technology trainings and control household phone access
Major discussion point
Inclusivity and Gender Equity in Technology Access
Topics
Human rights | Gender rights online | Development
Technology access must be intentional about including women and youth, not just assume they will benefit
Explanation
Brenda emphasizes that inclusion of women and youth in technology access must be deliberate and intentional, as it’s not common for them to naturally access technologies. This intentionality is a key part of human-centered design.
Evidence
It’s not often that we see women and youth being able to access technologies, so inclusion must be intentional
Major discussion point
Inclusivity and Gender Equity in Technology Access
Topics
Human rights | Gender rights online | Development
Farmer data availability for both private and public sectors is critical for innovation
Explanation
Brenda argues that monitoring for impact rather than just adoption is essential, and that farmer data must be available for both private and public sectors to drive innovation in agricultural solutions.
Evidence
It is easy to monitor for adoption by looking at how many farmers have access, but measuring impact is more critical
Major discussion point
Data Access and Management
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Data governance | Development
Agreed with
– Aminata Amadou Garba
– Clinton Oduor
Agreed on
Data accessibility and availability are critical barriers to digital agriculture innovation
All value chain actors must be brought together before deploying solutions to understand roles and data management
Explanation
Brenda explains that before field deployment, all stakeholders across the value chain must sit together to understand their roles, data management responsibilities, and how digitization will affect each actor. This ensures comprehensive inclusivity beyond just women and youth.
Evidence
Example from Rwanda dairy value chain project where producers, processors, collectors, quality controllers, and government all need to understand their roles in digitization
Major discussion point
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and Governance
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Data governance | Development
Young people understand technology quickly and can help older farmers adapt to new solutions
Explanation
Brenda identifies youth as agents of change who can quickly understand technology and work with older generation farmers to explain and help them adopt new technologies. This creates a bridge between technology and traditional farming practices.
Evidence
Youth are willing to work with older generation farmers to explain technology and help them adapt
Major discussion point
Youth as Agents of Change
Topics
Development | Capacity development | Sociocultural
Agreed with
– Clinton Oduor
Agreed on
Youth play a crucial role as agents of change and innovation in digital agriculture
Youth can provide extension advisory services as entrepreneurs, bridging the technology gap
Explanation
Brenda explains that young people can turn technology support into entrepreneurship opportunities, providing extension advisory services to farmers and helping them adopt technology as a business model.
Evidence
Example from daily value chain where young people provide extension advisory to farmers as entrepreneurship
Major discussion point
Youth as Agents of Change
Topics
Economic | Digital business models | Development
Agreed with
– Clinton Oduor
Agreed on
Youth play a crucial role as agents of change and innovation in digital agriculture
Monitoring for impact rather than just adoption is critical for development solutions
Explanation
Brenda distinguishes between monitoring adoption (how many farmers have access) and monitoring impact (actual benefits), emphasizing that measuring real impact is more important for development solutions.
Evidence
It is easy to monitor for adoption by looking at how many farmers have access, but what is the impact is a critical element
Major discussion point
Technology Implementation and Monitoring
Topics
Development | Sustainable development | Economic
National capacity building in public sector systems is essential for scalability and sustainability
Explanation
Since IFAD works through public sector investments to governments, Brenda emphasizes the need to strengthen public sector systems and build capacity in project management units. This includes addressing policy environment and enabling conditions for implementation.
Evidence
IFAD provides investments to governments and implements through public sector, requiring strengthened public sector systems and policy environment
Major discussion point
Technology Implementation and Monitoring
Topics
Development | Capacity development | Legal and regulatory
Solutions need to address smallholder farmers’ needs to move them from subsistence to commercialization
Explanation
In her closing statement, Brenda emphasizes that since 80% of food is produced by smallholder farmers, digital solutions must address their specific needs to help them transition from just feeding themselves to being able to commercialize and increase their income.
Evidence
80% of the food we eat is produced by smallholder farmers
Major discussion point
Scaling and Sustainability of Digital Solutions
Topics
Development | Economic | Sustainable development
Aminata Amadou Garba
Speech speed
179 words per minute
Speech length
846 words
Speech time
282 seconds
One-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas having half the connectivity of urban areas
Explanation
Aminata presents ITU statistics showing that about 30% of the global population is unconnected, but in least developed countries, only one-third is connected. The urban-rural divide is particularly stark, with rural areas having significantly lower connectivity rates.
Evidence
Latest ITU statistics show about 30% global population unconnected, in least developed countries only one-third connected, and twice as many people connected in urban vs rural areas
Major discussion point
Connectivity and Digital Infrastructure Challenges
Topics
Infrastructure | Telecommunications infrastructure | Development
Agreed with
– Clinton Oduor
Agreed on
Connectivity and digital infrastructure are primary barriers to inclusive digital agriculture
Open data and open APIs are needed to enable local innovators to contextualize solutions
Explanation
Aminata argues that while e-agricultural solutions are increasingly based on AI and data, the lack of accessible data prevents local innovators from contextualizing solutions. Open data and open APIs are essential to enable innovation and adaptation.
Evidence
Most e-agricultural solutions are based on AI and data, but data is not accessible for innovators who need to contextualize solutions
Major discussion point
Data Access and Management
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Data governance | Infrastructure
Agreed with
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Clinton Oduor
Agreed on
Data accessibility and availability are critical barriers to digital agriculture innovation
Private sector telecommunications providers need financial incentives to connect remote areas with sparse populations
Explanation
Aminata explains that telecommunications service providers are private sector entities that need return on investment. Using Niger as an example, she shows how vast distances and sparse populations in remote areas make it financially unviable for private companies to invest without policy support.
Evidence
Example from Niger where vast distances in the North require thousands of kilometers of infrastructure for very few people, making it financially unviable for private sector
Major discussion point
Connectivity and Digital Infrastructure Challenges
Topics
Infrastructure | Telecommunications infrastructure | Economic
Disagreed with
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Disagreed on
Role of private sector vs public sector in digital infrastructure deployment
Capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities is essential for digital solutions to improve socio-economic benefits
Explanation
In her closing statement, Aminata emphasizes that capacity development for smallholder farmers and the broader community is crucial so that digital technologies can be effectively used to improve socio-economic benefits.
Major discussion point
Inclusivity and Gender Equity in Technology Access
Topics
Development | Capacity development | Human rights
Ricardo Miron Torres
Speech speed
144 words per minute
Speech length
1055 words
Speech time
438 seconds
Digital public goods are designed with human-centered principles and can be adapted to local contexts
Explanation
Ricardo explains that digital public goods are open source technologies designed with specific principles in mind, including simplicity and local context adaptation. They serve as building blocks for solutions that can be tailored to specific needs while being human-centered in design.
Evidence
DPGs are designed for simplicity and can be implemented with local context in mind, which is very important
Major discussion point
Human-Centered Design and Local Context in Digital Agriculture
Topics
Infrastructure | Digital standards | Development
Agreed with
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
Agreed on
Local context and human-centered design are essential for successful digital agriculture implementation
Digital public goods enable reusable solutions across different places without reinventing the wheel
Explanation
Ricardo emphasizes that being open source allows developers and communities to access, adapt, and reuse technologies across different locations without starting from scratch. This is crucial given limited funding and time for addressing critical issues.
Evidence
Example of AI model for precision agriculture using open satellite images and data, delivered through SMS services for low connectivity areas
Major discussion point
Scaling and Sustainability of Digital Solutions
Topics
Infrastructure | Digital standards | Development
Agreed with
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
Agreed on
Scaling digital solutions from pilot to implementation requires intentional planning and clear pathways
Disagreed with
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
Disagreed on
Approach to technology implementation – pilots vs systematic infrastructure
Digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups
Explanation
Ricardo argues that digital public infrastructure should provide foundational layers like digital identity and payments, enabling public-private partnerships. This lowers barriers so that not only big corporations but also local players and startups can access these digital infrastructure layers.
Evidence
Foundational layers include digital identity, digital payments, and data exchange, which are critical for small farmers to access formal identity and financial services
Major discussion point
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and Governance
Topics
Infrastructure | Economic | Development
Disagreed with
– Aminata Amadou Garba
Disagreed on
Role of private sector vs public sector in digital infrastructure deployment
The path to equitable digital agriculture requires intentional design, collaboration, and commitment to public good
Explanation
In his closing statement, Ricardo emphasizes that achieving equitable and resilient digital agriculture is not primarily about technology itself, but rather about intentional design approaches, collaborative efforts, and maintaining commitment to serving the public good.
Major discussion point
Technology Implementation and Monitoring
Topics
Development | Human rights | Infrastructure
Clinton Oduor
Speech speed
154 words per minute
Speech length
812 words
Speech time
315 seconds
AI and Earth observation solutions must provide visibility into what’s happening on farms to enable informed decision-making
Explanation
Clinton explains that AI and Earth observation technologies can provide crucial visibility into farmland conditions, including historical data from satellites over the past 30 years. This visibility enables farmers to make informed decisions about planting, water stress, pest management, and other critical farming activities.
Evidence
Satellites have been orbiting Earth for 30 years providing historical data; Africa holds 65% of uncultivated land but is most data-scarce continent; over 60% of farms are smallholder farmers
Major discussion point
Human-Centered Design and Local Context in Digital Agriculture
Topics
Infrastructure | Development | Economic
Digital infrastructure and connectivity are the main barriers, requiring reliable, affordable, and high-bandwidth connections
Explanation
Clinton identifies connectivity as the primary challenge for digital agriculture, emphasizing that it’s not just about internet access but requires reliable, affordable, and high-bandwidth connections to create meaningful opportunities for farmers.
Evidence
Connectivity trends show one-third to two-thirds lack connectivity in developing world
Major discussion point
Connectivity and Digital Infrastructure Challenges
Topics
Infrastructure | Telecommunications infrastructure | Development
Agreed with
– Aminata Amadou Garba
Agreed on
Connectivity and digital infrastructure are primary barriers to inclusive digital agriculture
Youth-led startups face funding challenges as they don’t fit current VC investment models
Explanation
Clinton explains that many promising youth-led agri-tech innovations in the Global South don’t fit the current venture capital investment criteria, preventing them from moving beyond the ideation stage to implementation despite their potential.
Evidence
Many promising innovations never go beyond ideation stage due to funding challenges
Major discussion point
Scaling and Sustainability of Digital Solutions
Topics
Economic | Digital business models | Development
Agreed with
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
Agreed on
Youth play a crucial role as agents of change and innovation in digital agriculture
Investment in data and creating visibility into agri-food ecosystems is essential before implementing AI solutions
Explanation
In his closing statement, Clinton emphasizes that while there’s much talk about AI in agriculture, there cannot be effective AI without proper data. Therefore, investment in data collection and creating visibility into agri-food ecosystems must come first.
Major discussion point
Data Access and Management
Topics
Infrastructure | Development | Legal and regulatory
Agreed with
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Aminata Amadou Garba
Agreed on
Data accessibility and availability are critical barriers to digital agriculture innovation
Africa holds 65% of uncultivated land but is the most data-scarce continent
Explanation
Clinton highlights the paradox that Africa has the majority of the world’s uncultivated arable land but simultaneously suffers from the greatest lack of agricultural data, creating a significant opportunity gap for informed agricultural development.
Evidence
Africa holds about 65% of the world’s uncultivated area that can be cultivated but is the most data-scarce continent
Major discussion point
Data Access and Management
Topics
Development | Infrastructure | Economic
Agreed with
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Aminata Amadou Garba
Agreed on
Data accessibility and availability are critical barriers to digital agriculture innovation
Young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations
Explanation
Clinton points out that there’s often a disconnect between young people’s perception of regulation as hindering innovation, when in reality regulations address important issues like data privacy. He emphasizes the need for capacity building around understanding regulatory importance.
Evidence
Example of satellite data collected over 30 years raising privacy concerns; regulations around data transfer across boundaries remain problematic
Major discussion point
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and Governance
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Human rights | Privacy and data protection
Jimson Olufuye
Speech speed
143 words per minute
Speech length
182 words
Speech time
76 seconds
Universal access funds exist but often remain undeployed due to implementation challenges
Explanation
Jimson raises the question about whether universal cyber provision funds can help bridge connectivity gaps, implying that while these funding mechanisms exist, there are challenges in their effective deployment and utilization.
Major discussion point
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and Governance
Topics
Infrastructure | Economic | Development
Henry van Burgsteden
Speech speed
127 words per minute
Speech length
453 words
Speech time
213 seconds
FAO has supported 15 digital initiatives toward digital public goods certification with eight already certified
Explanation
Henry reports on FAO’s concrete progress in supporting digital public goods, with 15 initiatives supported toward certification and eight already certified, including the Digital Services Portfolio which won the WSIS 2024 Champions Award.
Evidence
Digital Services Portfolio recognized with WSIS 2024 Champions Award; FAO food loss app (FLAB) earned WSIS honor in 2025
Major discussion point
Technology Implementation and Monitoring
Topics
Development | Infrastructure | Legal and regulatory
Paul Spiesberger
Speech speed
132 words per minute
Speech length
1163 words
Speech time
526 seconds
Demand-driven approaches that listen to users first are essential for effective ICT4D implementation
Explanation
Paul emphasizes the importance of taking a demand-driven approach in ICT4D work, where organizations listen to users first before developing solutions for them. This user-centered methodology ensures that digital solutions actually meet the real needs of the communities they are designed to serve.
Evidence
Appreciation for Brenda’s demand-driven approach and emphasis on listening first to the user when starting to work for them
Major discussion point
Human-Centered Design and Local Context in Digital Agriculture
Topics
Development | Human rights | Capacity development
Time constraints in panel discussions should be managed to maximize expert knowledge sharing
Explanation
Paul advocates for efficient time management in panel discussions, suggesting that the 45 minutes should be used to give panelists the stage to share their expertise rather than spending time reading CV data. This approach prioritizes substantive content over formal introductions.
Evidence
Decision to give panelists 45 minutes to share expertise rather than reading CV data, and strict time management during Q&A
Major discussion point
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and Governance
Topics
Capacity development | Development
Digital agriculture solutions must address persistent challenges of connectivity, affordability, and digital literacy for inclusive development
Explanation
Paul identifies the core challenges that prevent inclusive digital agriculture from becoming reality, particularly for smallholder farmers in underserved regions. He emphasizes that these interconnected barriers must be addressed comprehensively to achieve equitable access to digital agricultural tools.
Evidence
Questions posed to panelists about addressing connectivity, affordability, and digital literacy challenges for smallholder farmers in underserved regions
Major discussion point
Connectivity and Digital Infrastructure Challenges
Topics
Development | Infrastructure | Human rights
Audience
Speech speed
104 words per minute
Speech length
146 words
Speech time
83 seconds
Regulatory sandboxes and operational frameworks should be considered to ensure stakeholder inclusivity in digital agriculture projects
Explanation
An audience member suggests that methodologies like regulatory sandboxes, operational frameworks, and hybrid approaches could be valuable tools for ensuring comprehensive stakeholder inclusion in digital agriculture initiatives. This reflects concern about how to systematically include all relevant parties in project development and implementation.
Evidence
Mention of sandboxes (regulatory, operational, hybrid) as potential methodologies for inclusivity
Major discussion point
Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration and Governance
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Development | Infrastructure
Universal access funds exist but often remain undeployed, hindering connectivity and capacity development progress
Explanation
An audience member raises concerns about the effectiveness of universal cyber provision funds in bridging digital gaps and fast-tracking productivity. The question implies that while funding mechanisms exist, there are significant implementation challenges preventing these funds from achieving their intended impact.
Evidence
Reference to universal cyber provision funds and concerns about bridging gaps and fast-tracking productivity in Africa
Major discussion point
Connectivity and Digital Infrastructure Challenges
Topics
Infrastructure | Economic | Development
Low-cost wireless sensor technologies distributed by drones could provide cost-effective solutions for agricultural monitoring
Explanation
An audience member suggests that wireless sensor nodes costing approximately one cent, distributed via planes or drones, could offer cost-effective solutions for agricultural monitoring. This represents interest in scalable, affordable technology deployment methods for rural agricultural communities.
Evidence
Reference to sensory nodes costing one cent distributed by planes, adaptable with drones for cost effectiveness
Major discussion point
Technology Implementation and Monitoring
Topics
Infrastructure | Economic | Development
Agreements
Agreement points
Local context and human-centered design are essential for successful digital agriculture implementation
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Arguments
Local context matters when implementing digitalization for agriculture, as different countries have different priorities and challenges
Solutions must be adopted by smallholder farmers and add value, not just implement technology for the sake of it
Digital public goods are designed with human-centered principles and can be adapted to local contexts
Summary
Both speakers emphasize that digital solutions must be designed with local context in mind and centered around human needs rather than technology-first approaches. They agree that successful implementation requires understanding specific local challenges and ensuring solutions add real value to users.
Topics
Development | Infrastructure | Human rights
Data accessibility and availability are critical barriers to digital agriculture innovation
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Aminata Amadou Garba
– Clinton Oduor
Arguments
Farmer data availability for both private and public sectors is critical for innovation
Open data and open APIs are needed to enable local innovators to contextualize solutions
Investment in data and creating visibility into agri-food ecosystems is essential before implementing AI solutions
Africa holds 65% of uncultivated land but is the most data-scarce continent
Summary
All three speakers identify data access as a fundamental challenge. They agree that without accessible, open data, innovation in digital agriculture cannot progress effectively, and that data infrastructure must be prioritized before implementing advanced technologies like AI.
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Infrastructure | Development
Connectivity and digital infrastructure are primary barriers to inclusive digital agriculture
Speakers
– Aminata Amadou Garba
– Clinton Oduor
Arguments
One-third of the global population remains unconnected, with rural areas having half the connectivity of urban areas
Digital infrastructure and connectivity are the main barriers, requiring reliable, affordable, and high-bandwidth connections
Summary
Both speakers identify connectivity as the fundamental challenge preventing inclusive digital agriculture, particularly in rural areas where most smallholder farmers are located. They agree that connectivity must be reliable, affordable, and high-quality to be effective.
Topics
Infrastructure | Telecommunications infrastructure | Development
Scaling digital solutions from pilot to implementation requires intentional planning and clear pathways
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Arguments
Pilots are important but often get stuck without clear pathways to scaling from the start
Digital public goods enable reusable solutions across different places without reinventing the wheel
Summary
Both speakers recognize that while pilot projects are valuable for testing solutions, they often fail to scale without proper planning. They agree that scalability must be considered from the beginning and that reusable, adaptable solutions are key to avoiding repeated failures.
Topics
Development | Economic | Infrastructure
Youth play a crucial role as agents of change and innovation in digital agriculture
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Clinton Oduor
Arguments
Young people understand technology quickly and can help older farmers adapt to new solutions
Youth can provide extension advisory services as entrepreneurs, bridging the technology gap
Youth-led startups face funding challenges as they don’t fit current VC investment models
Summary
Both speakers recognize youth as essential drivers of digital agriculture adoption and innovation. They agree that young people can bridge the technology gap between advanced solutions and traditional farming practices, while also identifying funding challenges that prevent youth-led innovations from scaling.
Topics
Development | Economic | Capacity development
Similar viewpoints
Both speakers emphasize that gender equity and inclusivity in technology access requires intentional design and capacity building, recognizing that women farmers are often excluded despite being primary agricultural workers.
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Aminata Amadou Garba
Arguments
Women farmers often cannot access technology despite being the majority of farmers in many countries
Technology access must be intentional about including women and youth, not just assume they will benefit
Capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities is essential for digital solutions to improve socio-economic benefits
Topics
Human rights | Gender rights online | Development
Both speakers emphasize that successful digital agriculture requires intentional approaches that consider broader implications including governance, collaboration, and regulatory frameworks rather than focusing solely on technology.
Speakers
– Ricardo Miron Torres
– Clinton Oduor
Arguments
The path to equitable digital agriculture requires intentional design, collaboration, and commitment to public good
Young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations
Topics
Development | Legal and regulatory | Human rights
Both speakers advocate for comprehensive multi-stakeholder approaches that bring together all relevant actors – from value chain participants to public-private partnerships – to ensure successful implementation and sustainability of digital solutions.
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Arguments
All value chain actors must be brought together before deploying solutions to understand roles and data management
Digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Development | Economic
Unexpected consensus
The critical importance of monitoring impact rather than just adoption metrics
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Henry van Burgsteden
Arguments
Monitoring for impact rather than just adoption is critical for development solutions
FAO has supported 15 digital initiatives toward digital public goods certification with eight already certified
Explanation
While one might expect focus on adoption rates and technology deployment, there was unexpected consensus on the need to measure actual impact and outcomes. This represents a mature understanding that technology deployment alone doesn’t guarantee development success.
Topics
Development | Infrastructure | Legal and regulatory
The need for regulatory frameworks and policy support rather than viewing regulation as hindrance
Speakers
– Clinton Oduor
– Aminata Amadou Garba
Arguments
Young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations
Private sector telecommunications providers need financial incentives to connect remote areas with sparse populations
Explanation
Unexpectedly, both speakers advocated for stronger regulatory frameworks and policy support rather than viewing regulation as a barrier to innovation. This shows recognition that appropriate governance is essential for sustainable digital agriculture development.
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Infrastructure | Development
Overall assessment
Summary
The speakers demonstrated strong consensus on fundamental challenges and approaches to digital agriculture, including the critical importance of human-centered design, data accessibility, connectivity infrastructure, intentional inclusivity, and multi-stakeholder collaboration. There was notable agreement on the need for sustainable scaling approaches and the recognition of youth as key agents of change.
Consensus level
High level of consensus with complementary expertise. The speakers approached digital agriculture from different angles (development finance, telecommunications policy, digital public goods, and youth innovation) but arrived at remarkably similar conclusions about core challenges and solutions. This consensus suggests a mature understanding of digital agriculture challenges and indicates strong potential for coordinated action across different sectors and stakeholder groups.
Differences
Different viewpoints
Role of private sector vs public sector in digital infrastructure deployment
Speakers
– Aminata Amadou Garba
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Arguments
Private sector telecommunications providers need financial incentives to connect remote areas with sparse populations
Digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups
Summary
Aminata emphasizes the challenges of relying on private sector for connectivity, noting that telecom providers need return on investment and won’t serve unprofitable remote areas without policy support. Ricardo advocates for public-private partnerships through digital public infrastructure that enables broader participation beyond just big corporations.
Topics
Infrastructure | Economic | Development
Approach to technology implementation – pilots vs systematic infrastructure
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Arguments
Pilots are important but often get stuck without clear pathways to scaling from the start
Digital public goods enable reusable solutions across different places without reinventing the wheel
Summary
Brenda sees pilots as necessary but problematic double-edged swords that often fail to scale, requiring clear scaling pathways from the start. Ricardo advocates for building reusable digital public goods infrastructure that can be adapted across contexts without starting from scratch each time.
Topics
Development | Infrastructure | Digital standards
Unexpected differences
Youth role in technology adoption vs innovation funding
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Clinton Oduor
Arguments
Young people understand technology quickly and can help older farmers adapt to new solutions
Youth-led startups face funding challenges as they don’t fit current VC investment models
Explanation
While both speakers recognize youth as important agents of change, they focus on different aspects of the challenge. Brenda sees youth primarily as technology adoption facilitators and entrepreneurs within existing systems, while Clinton identifies systemic funding barriers that prevent youth-led innovations from scaling. This represents different perspectives on whether the solution is better youth integration or structural funding reform.
Topics
Economic | Digital business models | Development
Overall assessment
Summary
The panel showed remarkable consensus on core challenges (connectivity, inclusivity, local context) but differed on implementation approaches and systemic solutions. Main disagreements centered on public vs private sector roles, pilot-based vs infrastructure-based approaches, and whether to focus on adaptation of existing solutions or building new foundational systems.
Disagreement level
Low to moderate disagreement level with high strategic implications. While speakers agreed on problems and goals, their different approaches to solutions reflect fundamental differences in development philosophy – whether to work within existing systems through pilots and partnerships, or to build new foundational digital public infrastructure. These disagreements are constructive and complementary rather than conflicting, suggesting multiple valid pathways toward the same objectives.
Partial agreements
Partial agreements
Similar viewpoints
Both speakers emphasize that gender equity and inclusivity in technology access requires intentional design and capacity building, recognizing that women farmers are often excluded despite being primary agricultural workers.
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Aminata Amadou Garba
Arguments
Women farmers often cannot access technology despite being the majority of farmers in many countries
Technology access must be intentional about including women and youth, not just assume they will benefit
Capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities is essential for digital solutions to improve socio-economic benefits
Topics
Human rights | Gender rights online | Development
Both speakers emphasize that successful digital agriculture requires intentional approaches that consider broader implications including governance, collaboration, and regulatory frameworks rather than focusing solely on technology.
Speakers
– Ricardo Miron Torres
– Clinton Oduor
Arguments
The path to equitable digital agriculture requires intentional design, collaboration, and commitment to public good
Young innovators need better understanding of regulation importance, including data privacy considerations
Topics
Development | Legal and regulatory | Human rights
Both speakers advocate for comprehensive multi-stakeholder approaches that bring together all relevant actors – from value chain participants to public-private partnerships – to ensure successful implementation and sustainability of digital solutions.
Speakers
– Brenda Mulele Gunde
– Ricardo Miron Torres
Arguments
All value chain actors must be brought together before deploying solutions to understand roles and data management
Digital public infrastructure requires public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups
Topics
Legal and regulatory | Development | Economic
Takeaways
Key takeaways
Digital agriculture solutions must be human-centered and adapted to local contexts, as different countries have varying priorities and challenges
Connectivity remains a major barrier with one-third of the global population unconnected, and rural areas having half the connectivity of urban areas
Inclusivity requires intentional design to ensure women and youth access technology, despite women being the majority of farmers in many countries
Pilots are essential but often fail to scale without clear pathways established from the start
Data availability and open data policies are critical foundations for AI and digital agriculture innovation
Multi-stakeholder collaboration involving all value chain actors is necessary before deploying digital solutions
Youth serve as agents of change who can bridge technology gaps and provide entrepreneurial extension services
Digital public goods and infrastructure enable reusable, scalable solutions without vendor lock-in
Monitoring must focus on impact rather than just adoption rates to ensure meaningful development outcomes
80% of food is produced by smallholder farmers, so solutions must address their needs to enable commercialization and income growth
Resolutions and action items
FAO is developing a digital agriculture and AI innovation roadmap to guide inclusive and scalable transformation
Need to invest in data creation and visibility into agri-food ecosystems as a foundation for AI solutions
Emphasis on capacity development for smallholder farmers and communities to improve socio-economic benefits
Continue co-creation and action for inclusive, affordable, and sustainable digital agriculture aligned with 2030 agenda goals
Unresolved issues
How to effectively deploy universal access funds that often remain unused in African countries
Funding mechanisms for youth-led startups that don’t fit current VC investment models
Regulatory ambiguity and policy frameworks around data privacy and cross-border data sharing
Technical implementation of low-cost sensor solutions and their practical application in rural contexts
Bridging the gap between private sector infrastructure investment incentives and rural connectivity needs
Ensuring long-term sustainability of digital solutions beyond pilot phases
Suggested compromises
Public-private partnerships to enable local ecosystems and startups while leveraging private sector infrastructure
Using SMS services to deliver AI-powered solutions in low connectivity areas as an intermediate solution
Combining open source technologies with proprietary platforms where necessary, while maintaining core openness principles
Balancing data openness with privacy concerns through proper governance frameworks
Utilizing youth as intermediaries to help older farmers adopt technology while creating entrepreneurial opportunities
Thought provoking comments
We talk a lot about pilots being a double-edged sword. What I mean is sometimes you can pilot a solution for maybe 10,000 to 50 or 2,000 to 10,000 farmers, but it gets stuck in the pilot, it does not get to scale. So, at the same time, pilots are also important because pilots help us to understand in terms of what are some of the local challenges that you need to deal with… the pathway to scaling up has to be clear from the start, before you start the pilot.
Speaker
Brenda Mulele Gunde
Reason
This comment addresses a critical paradox in development work – the necessity of pilots versus the challenge of scaling. It challenges the conventional wisdom that pilots are inherently good by highlighting their potential to become dead ends, while simultaneously acknowledging their value for understanding local contexts.
Impact
This insight reframed the discussion from simply implementing technology solutions to thinking strategically about scalability from the outset. It influenced subsequent speakers to consider sustainability and long-term vision in their responses, particularly Ricardo’s emphasis on building digital public infrastructure rather than just individual solutions.
When it comes to accessing technology, they are not the first ones to be accessing technology. It’s usually the men that go for these trainings. They come home, and they don’t tell even the woman what they have been trained on. There’s one phone in the house, and the phone is accessed by the husband. If the husband doesn’t leave the phone, if extending extension advisory, nobody also has it. All those dynamics that we’re dealing with are part of human-centered designing.
Speaker
Brenda Mulele Gunde
Reason
This comment provides a stark, concrete illustration of how gender dynamics create barriers to technology access in rural communities. It moves beyond abstract discussions of ‘inclusivity’ to reveal the specific household-level power structures that undermine digital agriculture initiatives.
Impact
This observation grounded the entire panel’s discussion in real-world social dynamics, making subsequent speakers more conscious of addressing practical barriers rather than just technical solutions. It reinforced the human-centered design theme throughout the remaining presentations.
The difference between just open source and digital public goods is also that they are designed for privacy, that they use open standards and best practices for interoperability… if the underlying components to access that solution is not open, then you might risk being a vendor locked in or have security risks that you might not know of.
Speaker
Ricardo Miron Torres
Reason
This comment introduces crucial technical nuance by distinguishing between merely being ‘open source’ and being truly accessible as digital public goods. It highlights often-overlooked issues of vendor lock-in and hidden dependencies that can undermine the sustainability of digital solutions.
Impact
This technical insight elevated the discussion from general advocacy for open solutions to a more sophisticated understanding of digital infrastructure requirements. It connected to Brenda’s earlier point about sustainability and influenced the conversation toward thinking about long-term digital ecosystem building rather than individual applications.
Africa holds about 65% thereabouts of the world’s uncultivated area that can be cultivated. But again, it’s the most data-scarce continent in the world, meaning that we don’t have visibility of what’s happening, for example, for the farmlands.
Speaker
Clinton Oduor
Reason
This comment presents a striking paradox – the continent with the greatest agricultural potential has the least data about its agricultural systems. It reframes the discussion from technology implementation to fundamental data infrastructure needs.
Impact
This observation shifted the conversation toward data as a foundational requirement rather than an afterthought. It reinforced the earlier themes about building infrastructure first and influenced the final recommendations where Clinton emphasized ‘we really need to invest in data first’ and other panelists echoed the importance of data visibility and access.
Most young people usually think that our regulation is there maybe not to make like innovation go forward but most of the time that’s surely not the case. So we also need to build like some capacity around like the importance of regulation and this include like things such as data privacy.
Speaker
Clinton Oduor
Reason
This comment reveals a critical disconnect between young innovators and regulatory frameworks, suggesting that the problem isn’t just regulation itself but a lack of understanding about its purpose and importance. It challenges the common narrative that regulation simply hinders innovation.
Impact
This insight introduced a new dimension to the discussion about barriers to innovation, moving beyond infrastructure and funding to include regulatory literacy. It suggested that capacity building needs to work in both directions – not just helping regulators understand innovation, but helping innovators understand regulation.
Overall assessment
These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by moving it beyond surface-level technology advocacy to address deeper systemic challenges. Brenda’s insights about pilot scalability and gender dynamics established a foundation of practical realism that influenced all subsequent speakers to ground their technical solutions in social and operational realities. Ricardo’s technical distinctions about digital public goods elevated the conversation’s sophistication, while Clinton’s observations about Africa’s data paradox and regulatory disconnects provided crucial context about implementation challenges. Together, these comments created a progression from identifying problems (gender barriers, pilot limitations) to understanding technical requirements (true openness, interoperability) to recognizing foundational needs (data infrastructure, regulatory literacy). The discussion evolved from individual technology solutions toward systemic thinking about digital ecosystems, ultimately culminating in the panelists’ final recommendations that emphasized data investment, smallholder farmer focus, capacity development, and intentional public-good design.
Follow-up questions
How can we ensure that all stakeholders are inclusive in digital agriculture projects, and what methodologies like sandboxes (regulatory, operational, hybrid) can be considered?
Speaker
Jimson Olufuye
Explanation
This question addresses the critical need for comprehensive stakeholder engagement in digital agriculture initiatives, seeking specific methodological approaches to ensure true inclusivity beyond just end-users.
How do we get people to have access to digital agriculture technologies and emphasize capacity development to bridge the gap and fast-track productivity?
Speaker
Jimson Olufuye
Explanation
This question focuses on the practical implementation challenges of scaling digital agriculture solutions, particularly in developing countries where capacity building remains a persistent challenge.
How do we obtain and access data for digital agriculture solutions, and can universal cyber provision funds help in this regard?
Speaker
Jimson Olufuye
Explanation
This addresses the fundamental challenge of data availability and accessibility for digital agriculture innovations, exploring potential funding mechanisms to support data infrastructure development.
Have wireless sensory nodes (costing around one cent) distributed via planes or drones been approached as solutions in rural communities?
Speaker
Kathleen (engineer)
Explanation
This technical question explores cost-effective sensor deployment methods for precision agriculture, which could significantly reduce implementation costs in resource-constrained environments.
How can the universal access funds that have been sitting unused in banks for years in African countries be effectively deployed for connectivity?
Speaker
Implied by Aminata Amadou Garba’s response
Explanation
This highlights a critical policy and implementation gap where available funding mechanisms are not being utilized effectively to address connectivity challenges.
How can we address the financial viability challenges for private sector telecommunications providers to extend services to sparsely populated rural areas?
Speaker
Implied by Aminata Amadou Garba’s response
Explanation
This addresses the market failure in telecommunications infrastructure deployment in rural areas where return on investment is insufficient for private sector participation.
How can we develop context-sensitive data collection mechanisms for low-cost agricultural sensors that farmers can actually use?
Speaker
Implied by Aminata Amadou Garba’s response
Explanation
This addresses the gap between available low-cost sensor technology and practical implementation that considers farmer capabilities and local contexts.
How can we move beyond pilots to achieve scalable implementation of digital agriculture solutions?
Speaker
Brenda Mulele Gunde
Explanation
This addresses the critical challenge of scaling successful pilot projects, which is essential for achieving widespread impact in digital agriculture initiatives.
How can we ensure that women and youth have equal access to agricultural technologies despite existing social and economic barriers?
Speaker
Brenda Mulele Gunde
Explanation
This addresses persistent gender and age-based digital divides in agricultural technology access, which is crucial for inclusive development.
How can we develop sustainable funding mechanisms for youth-led agri-tech startups that don’t fit traditional VC investment criteria?
Speaker
Clinton Oduor
Explanation
This addresses the funding gap for innovative agricultural technology solutions developed by young entrepreneurs in the Global South.
How can we address regulatory ambiguity and build capacity around the importance of regulation, including data privacy concerns for agricultural data?
Speaker
Clinton Oduor
Explanation
This addresses the need for clearer regulatory frameworks and better understanding of regulatory importance among young innovators in the agricultural technology space.
Disclaimer: This is not an official session record. DiploAI generates these resources from audiovisual recordings, and they are presented as-is, including potential errors. Due to logistical challenges, such as discrepancies in audio/video or transcripts, names may be misspelled. We strive for accuracy to the best of our ability.