Blog post

BLOG - Data as a source of income

article_published_on_label
September 6, 2013

Data from farmers and growers is increasing in value. One of the reasons for this is that data tells the story of a product. An egg, for instance, is much like any other egg; there is not much difference in how eggs look or taste. But the data about the production methods makes it possible to receive more money for one egg than for another, for instance if the data shows that the first egg is produced in a more animal-friendly or sustainable way than the second one.

Another reason that data from farmers is becoming increasingly important in the food industry is that in some situations, the industry is concerned about future food supplies and the industry's environmental impact. The food industry wants to monitor and improve the sustainability of production methods in order to ensure that it doesn't have to worry about a lack of good raw materials in the future. This requires data from farmers.

A third reason is that computers and software are capable of performing more and more operations, and this has resulted in the idea of 'big data'. If you have very large amounts of data and you monitor this data, it is possible to discover new correlations and causality and gain new insights, making it possible to give better advice. It wouldn't be necessary to limit yourself to a random test lifting of sugar beets every four weeks, but you could follow growth every day in every plot via satellite. Every cow could wear a pedometer. There is also an increase in the number of smart phone apps which provide farmers with advice on the basis of access to data from crop registration systems. Some people, however, see the spectre of Big Brother in big data.

Finally, there is a fourth reason why data is gaining in value: Sales representatives and advisers are becoming increasingly expensive. Their time is too expensive to spend the first half hour of an initial consultation just copying information at the kitchen table. They want to be sent digital information in advance from the farmer's or grower's computer, because this reduces costs.

Product buyers have two options for collecting data from farmers: either require it (or agree within the cooperative that this will be the joint strategy), or pay farmers for it (either via the product, as is the case with eggs, or by paying a certain amount per data set). The jury is still out on this issue.

I expect this trend to continue, a development which in  itself is a positive thing. With more data, it will be possible to improve management, and the consumer will be able to get the story behind the product. Ultimately this will result in more sustainable agriculture and horticulture. For these reasons we are proud to present the 1.000th sustainability report this week (website in Dutch only). The sustainability reports enable farmers to compare their performance with those of their colleagues. But it is also a positive thing if farmers and growers remain in control of where their data, and the estimates that others make about their businesses, go to. At LEI, we are developing new types of software to this end within European projects. And it may be possible for the data to represent a new source of income for farmers and growers. Or farmers may be able to share their data in exchange for interesting new information, as currently occurs within the LEI Farm Accountancy Data Network.