Agriculture meets Design

In one way or another, we’re all linked to agriculture. Food availability is the basis for building any civilization. But what we’re also hearing is the challenges that agriculture has to meet. The world population is expanding and soon we’ll have to sustain 9 billion people. There is pressure on critical natural resources, like water, soil, fuel. And this is all happening amidst unprecedented change in the global political and economic landscape.

The good news is that this challenge to agriculture is widely recognized. Issues on agriculture are climbing up the agenda’s in an increasing number of fora. The bad news is though that agriculture is stuck. And by stuck I mean that key players in the field are not reaching the level of dialogue that is needed to meet the challenge at hand. It’s industrial agriculture vs organic agriculture, pro-GMO vs non-GMO, omnivores vs vegans., agronomy vs farmers’ intuition, etc vs etc.

With this form of conversation, solutions remain isolated as foreign languages and don’t connect. They’re caught inside the buildings where agriculture is professed, while the facts and answers to our problems are outside, where farming is practiced. Such a conversation landscape overemphasizes differences between tribes, aggravating opposing views, rather than enabling recognition and utilization of mutual strengths and gains from trade. Only conservative, incremental tweaking can come from this, while what the world acutely needs is a fundamental rework of how we produce and distribute food.

What can we do about it?
Despite the negative effects of polarities in the system, you can also look at it in another way. Wouldn’t it be great if we can use this diverse body of experience and knowledge available and leverage complementarities, rather than allowing the usual patterns of interaction to emphasize disconnect? Wouldn’t that enable a broad sensemaking inquiry into the problems at hand in our agricultural system, rather than remaining at refinement exercises within our own disciplines? Wouldn’t vested views on problems then turn into challenging assumptions that are to be examined and tested?

We need to create an enabling space where these new conversations can be started, conversations with ideas that will fire innovation; discipline to discipline, people to people. Ideas that progress from such conversations will likely create new paths of solution development, lowering barriers to adoption of new, game changing ideas by nature of having traversed that path. This is, I think, what we can expect when we build a space where agriculture meets design.

——————————-

Me and my colleagues will be active on the Agri Meets Design platform at the Dutch Design Week in October in Eindhoven, working with farmers and multidisciplinary design teams on experience and business model design. There will be many more equally excellent or even better events given by the partners who made Agri Meets Design possible!  I hope to also see you there! Ping me on twitter if you’re interested to connect!

Value proposition, and value delivery in emerging markets through trust

Life is hard for people with low and irregular income streams in developing countries. Under these circumstances, opportunity cost for your time and money weighs in heavily. The implications of losing time, or losing money usually mean that you are not able to buy food for the day, or worse even that you need to somehow expand your debt to be able to survive. With such a burden of consequences, you can imagine that the prevalent uncertainty fundamentally influences the way in which this demographic makes its choices.

One of the affected key factors in making a choice on spending time and money, or supporting choice making, is trust. Just taking someone’s word that something will turn out well is probably not a good bet. This is because the uncertainty of something not turning out as expected comes fully at your own expense. This burden won’t be shared. Hence trust is hard to come by.

Lack of trust has huge implications for delivering value in the markets we’re discussing. Products or services should be sure to deliver exactly on the promised value in line with what the customer would expect. If they don’t, then you won’t be a business. Companies seeking to target these customers need to put a lot of effort in to mitigate uncertainty to the consequences of the customer’s choice, way more than we’re used to in predictable developed countries.

Trust, what is it good for?
An example of a successful business, which leverages trust is the Baricho Farmers Store in Karatina, Kenya (One stop supermarket for farmers), which I recently visited. The lady running the store told me that when she gets new varieties of seed, she will test them on her own farm herself first.

Baricho Farmers Store

The Baricho Farmers Store in Karatina, Kenya

An example of this test and its result is the picture below, where she displays a laminated picture of the Faida Seeds maize plant variety. In the back you see the maize plant’s corn cobs hanging upside down from the shelf. Farmers can have a look for themselves and get assurance that they will be getting what they pay for: the cobs can really get that big! This store was reputed as one of the best running agro-input businesses in the area, which is no wonder, given the various sources for creating assurance and trust on display

 Faida Seeds

Corn cobs on display of new varieties of seed in the store

So what would we need to take into consideration when creating trust on delivering value as effectively as the Baricho Farmers Store?

Radical usability and applicability are important. These ensure that customers get what they pay for, which in itself provides for a basis of trust. Under the assurance of usability and applicability, customers might even pay a premium if a really relevant problem is solved (again the Farmers Store is a case in point for this; not the cheapest, but it is the best).

But usability, and applicability are product factors, and thus not the only factors to take into account for value delivery. My conjecture is that successful, widely adopted products or services in emerging markets, also offer the customer multiple sources for verification of a product’s potential value: multiple testing points to assure that customers will be getting what they pay for. From a collection of my observations during my last field visit in Kenya, like the Farmers Store, I would suggest that providing multiple sources of verification implies that:

  • the point of sale is personal, allowing for two-way interaction in communication
  • reputation (accumulated trust) is backing the transaction, like a (personal) brand
  • the customer has access to, and is informed through independent and ubiquitous -visual/audio- information resources

If you provide these sources of verification, and customers get what they pay for, then you’re effectively creating trust. In the worst case your customers will be able to discuss defective products with neighbors as a check (“Did you see the picture and the cobs in the store?”,  “How are those seeds working out for you?”, etc) These sources of verification will thus ensure that lemons are sorted from the market as swiftly as possible. Under such levels of verification, the resulting trust might even bear witness to customers knowingly forgoing a meal to acquire the value of your product or service.

Conclusion
Lack of trust and its origin is rarely recognized enough when marketing products and services to people with irregular income streams, living under conditions of uncertainty. I would conjecture even that lack of exhibiting trust is the factor which most often causes failure in value delivery in emerging markets, even if the proposition itself, in essence, would be perfect.

What this means for organizations like (social venture) startups, multinational corporations, and development projects, seeking for a position with the lower income brackets in emerging markets, is that they need to design new business models that convey trust by allowing customers to easily verify a product’s value through multiple channels. Positive intent alone will not suffice.

——————

This is the fifth piece in a continuing series of posts (starting here) on what the role of human-centered design could be in development work. I’m working on this together with Niti Bhan, who will also be posting her observations at her Perspective blog. Posts are categorized as VCD