Distribution Channels for Agriculture Equipment Systems in India

Overview

The long run of substantial growth in the Indian economy since liberalization in 1991 spread opportunities for business expansion and entrepreneurial start-ups in all commercial sectors, including agriculture. During the past decade and a half, noticeable gains in the purchasing power occurred for some Indian farmers. Their economic circumstances improved through the expansion and strengthening of infrastructure, rapid farm consolidation to take advantage of economies of scale, adoption of genetically modified cropping, and utilization of more productive agriculture equipment systems. However, there are 700 million farmers in India – the second largest block in the world behind China – and clearly, not all enjoyed the same level of benefit from the blistering economy as evidenced by the article, “India on Fire” in the current issue of The Economist.

Regardless of economic strata and chosen agricultural practices, all farmers are dependent on some type of agriculture equipment system to conduct their farming operations. The range of different equipment systems is quite broad, extending from low-investment handheld tools moved by draft animals to extensive, high-investment “packages” of machinery, computer systems, integrated software, and global communication networks. As with any complex marketing landscape, matching solutions with opportunities to make a difference for the customer and the company is essential.

The following graphic illustrates the interrelationships of the number of farmers, farm size, and market potential for sales of agriculture equipment systems.

The distribution clearly shows that 695 million farmers hold 80% of the arable land in India on farm sizes that are less than 2 hectares, approximately 5 acres, each. In fact, estimates suggest that 600 million farmers work on lot sizes that are each less than 1.5 hectares, or slightly less than 4 acres. This distribution is significant for several reasons, but one that features prominently when considering a marketing distribution channel strategy in India is population, both in terms of density and migration. As evident by the sheer number of people involved, unchecked farm consolidation, such as what occurred in North America and Europe since WWII, is not a viable course.

The infrastructures of urban areas in India would be quickly overwhelmed if even 25-30 % of the 700 million farmers scattered across India abandoned their rural homes in hopes of brighter futures in the cities. The challenge facing India, then, is to improve agriculture practices, increase output, and raise the quality of life for 700 million farmers so they choose to stay put. Not an easy mandate to meet.

Such distribution coupled with a wide variance in farming conditions within India’s agricultural regions and a diversity of farming methods and crop portfolios in each creates a complex marketing space that is anything but homogeneous. Developing a distribution channel strategy under these circumstances is problematic unless due consideration is given to the segmentation scheme and the value propositions for those segments.

Channel Design and Infrastructure

Regardless of segment, the design of distribution channels is dictated by the reach, capability, and capacity of three fundamental systems of infrastructure: information / communication technologies, electrical power, and roadways / waterways.

1) Farmers, no matter how remote, have to communicate: among themselves, with suppliers, downstream processors and retailers, government agencies, and financiers. The more direct the connections without brokers and middlemen the better. ITC has carried this point further than many through the implementation of their trademarked e-Choupal system. Comprised of self-contained solar-powered kiosks, satellite downlink stations and cellular microwave towers, and computers, nearly 4 million farmers throughout India are able to communicate by phone, access the information from the Internet, conduct online transactions, and make daily decisions about their farming operations.

A successful channel strategy begins with the virtualization of the products, services, and solutions so they flow through the information and communication networks to current and prospective customers. This constitutes a clear value proposition through improved decision making. It also establishes the first level of trust that the relationship between provider and customer is not exploitative, but mutually beneficial.

2) It takes electrical power for a farming operation to function, despite where it is located or what is in its business portfolio. Currently, India imports 100 million tonnes of crude oil per annum and is projected to import 300 million tonnes per year by 2030. In addition, India possesses the fourth largest coal reserves in the world. However, consuming it to generate electrical power in an environmentally sound manner is problematic and costly to resolve. To continue aggressive economic growth while not compromising the environment or being held hostage, politically, by unfriendly, oil-rich nations, India must develop alternative energy sources. In a press release earlier this week, Indian president, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, committed to put India on the path toward energy independence by 2030. Furthering the use of electrical power generated through renewable energy sources like wind, solar, geo-thermal, and biomass / methane is central to India meeting this long-term energy goal.

A successful channel strategy contributes to this in a two-fold manner. First, it discourages more dependence on oil by delivering agriculture equipment systems that do not require fossil fuels to operate. Second, it encourages the development, commercialization, and adoption of alternative energy sources to generate electrical power for agriculture. This enables farmers in rural areas where the electrical grid does not reach to have the technologies available to generate the electrical power they need. Also, as the grid becomes available they have the opportunity to draw from it as needed and transfer surplus power they generate onto it for revenue. This posits a value proposition that reduces the cost of farming operations and improves productivity and profitability. Furthermore, fostering an alignment of business interests with government intentions and policies establishes a second level of trust between the provider and customer.

3) As farm productivity increases so do variety and volume of inputs and outputs. Moving, storing, applying, and disposing of more and more material within the same block of time drives the food system to hit the limits of capability and capacity preventing it from working efficiently and effectively. India has a number of critical initiatives underway that target an overburdened infrastructure for receipt of more resources and assistance as evidenced in “Priorities for The New Millennium” by the Asian Development Bank. This is complemented by a continuing effort to setup Special Economic Zones (SEZ) that, in part, facilitates the building of critical infrastructure. It also has a dampening effect on population migration due to farm consolidation by creating jobs that can be filled by those who are displaced from farming operations. A speculative argument by Indian development economist, Atanu Dey, and Vinod Khosla advances a concept called Rural Infrastructure Services Common (RISC), that addresses rural population, infrastructure, and economic improvement. While not necessarily the answer, it does offer insight into the degree with which people of influence and power in India are aware of the issues and are searching for answers.

A successful channel strategy distributes information, methodologies, and capabilities to people engaged in agriculture so that they can work through or around infrastructure deficiencies or build-up the infrastructure so that it is no longer an impediment to growth. Of particular importance is the delivery of product and service packages primarily intended for agricultural operations but can serve a dual purpose in building, upgrading, or maintaining physical infrastructure such as roads and waterways. This establishes a value proposition based on multi-use applications for basic equipment systems thereby leveraging the investments by farmers and contributing to additional growth opportunities. Because such an approach does not place the farmer in a bad situation where the benefits promised by increased productivity are cancelled through losses due to infrastructure weaknesses, a third level of trust that speaks to a long term commitment by the provider to the customer.

To design a distribution channel strategy for agriculture equipment systems in India, it is a critical to first understand information / communication technology, electrical power, and roadway / waterway infrastructures then, respond to the business context established by them. As the graphic below suggests, the rate of adoption for various agriculture equipment systems varies from one segment to another depending on the size of the farming operation, the ability of farmers to take advantage of available opportunities, and the potential for sustaining the business. Projecting across a ten-year period, greater adoption, market share, and revenue will go to the provider of systems that span across the full landscape of Indian farming operations.

To try to sustain a growth strategy by ignoring the bottom-of-the-pyramid (BOP) representing the vast majority of farmers and tapping the upper-end who lead the adoption curve and have the most resources to invest will yield short-lived and unsatisfactory results. Accusations of exploitation of the masses will take its toll on reputation, incite resistance, and drag down sales performance as reflected in numerous press articles (“Farm Widows in India Fear Crop of Creditors,” by Aparna Pallavi and “The Tale of Three Widows,” by Jaideep Hardikar in India Together online magazine) and research papers (“Biotechnology and Suicide in India,” by Glenn Davis Stone) about increases in farmer suicides.

Moving Forward with a Distribution Channel

Given these dynamics, there are three steps in initiating, expanding, and sustaining a distribution channel for agriculture equipment systems in India:

Take advantage of existing or supplement information and communication networks to disseminate valued information about agriculture in an Indian context to prospective customers. This is a low-price, high-value service with low entry barriers and costs that quickly establishes a first level of trust upon which additional value can be delivered.
Expand upon the initial business information to include knowledge about the larger Indian economic and political “system” in relationship to technological developments and the realities of community life to deliver product and service packages that make a difference for the agricultural businesses, environmental conditions, and community stability. This is a moderately priced, high-value package of services and products from different providers that collectively leverages the investment of the customer while providing an acceptable return for the providers.
Engage major players from industry, government, academe, and the community to affect larger, more capital-intensive projects that serve broader objectives to build more capacity and further improve productivity. This is a higher priced, high-value package of services, products, and solution management from a wide range of providers.

Essentially, this is an “infrastructure first” approach that endears the company to the people by putting in their hands the information, knowledge, and resources they need to be successful. This is the key differentiator among equals. It builds a trusting relationship based on the clarity of motive, integrity in deed, and delivery of what works for the majority before moving into more extensive and riskier endeavors that may exceed the customer’s boundaries of healthy speculation. This means that the marketers, the dealers, and the sales force must know their customers so they can keep them positioned for sustained success without overrunning their headlights. And this brings us back to best approach for partnering with the Indian farmer: focus on improving the infrastructure – it is THE winning strategy!

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Saturday, February 3, 2007

Localize – Link – Globalize: A Closer Look at India

In my previous posting about Mukesh Ambani’s ambitious plans for Reliance Retail, Ltd., he intends to “revolutionize” two sectors: farming and retail in the process of establishing this new business. His plan to “invest more than $5 billion by 2011 to put both the farms and the stores on the road to modernity, connect them through a distribution system guided by the latest logistics technology, and create enough of a surplus to generate $20 billion in agricultural exports annually” is a bold statement of the speed, scope, and degree to which he will attack the prevailing system. No doubt this will have an impact – revolution does that, although there are often unintended consequences!

Usually, “revolutionize” in the context of agriculture means introducing labor-saving, automated, integrated mechanical and biological systems that eliminate the need for human participation. This accomplishes three things: reduces the cost of the operation by taking people out of the equation; displaces people who are no longer needed in support of agriculture so that they are compelled to do something else; and lengthens the distance between the point of agricultural production and the point of consumption of food, feed, fiber, or fuel. This approach was effective during the last century in those areas of the world where human labor was needed to power the growth of the industrial sector. In fact, the mechanization of agriculture and the subsequent displacement of people from farming and rural areas was a perfect complement to the growth of industries in the urban centers. Is the world ready for more of that?

The last thing countries with the most populous cities in the world need is more people migrating from the less populated rural areas to the urban areas. Further overcrowding of already overwhelmed infrastructures helps no one and contributes further to decline in the quality and even sustainability of life. Still, with nowhere else to go and no hope where they are, relocation to the cities is often the only recourse people have in these circumstances.

The question is: how can technology be applied in the farming sector such that the people whose welfare is dependent on agriculture are able to have sufficient quality of life centered around the principles and values they hold dear at their local community level yet be able to scale their output to meet the demand of more distant communities in need of what they produce?

One way to begin to answer this is through the e-Choupal system introduced by ITC, Ltd. to farmers throughout rural India.

ITC describes e-choupal as a system that…

…leverages Information Technology to virtually cluster all the value chain participants, delivering the same benefits as vertical integration does in mature agricultural economies like the USA.

‘e-Choupal’ makes use of the physical transmission capabilities of current intermediaries – aggregation, logistics, counter-party risk and bridge financing – while disintermediating them from the chain of information flow and market signals.

With a judicious blend of click & mortar capabilities, village internet kiosks managed by farmers – called sanchalaks – themselves, enable the agricultural community access ready information in their local language on the weather & market prices, disseminate knowledge on scientific farm practices & risk management, facilitate the sale of farm inputs (now with embedded knowledge) and purchase farm produce from the farmers’ doorsteps (decision making is now information-based).

Real-time information and customised knowledge provided by ‘e-Choupal’ enhance the ability of farmers to take decisions and align their farm output with market demand and secure quality & productivity. The aggregation of the demand for farm inputs from individual farmers gives them access to high quality inputs from established and reputed manufacturers at fair prices. As a direct marketing channel, virtually linked to the ‘mandi’ system for price discovery, ‘e-Choupal’ eliminates wasteful intermediation and multiple handling. Thereby it significantly reduces transaction costs.

‘e-Choupal’ ensures world-class quality in delivering all these goods & services through several product / service specific partnerships with the leaders in the respective fields, in addition to ITC’s own expertise.

While the farmers benefit through enhanced farm productivity and higher farm gate prices, ITC benefits from the lower net cost of procurement (despite offering better prices to the farmer) having eliminated costs in the supply chain that do not add value.”

Of course, for ITC to make this work requires a dedication to growing its business by engaging farmers as partners in making their businesses successful. ITC’s sustainability policies are based on a deep and unwavering commitment to the people of rural India: to help them improve the quality of their lives, provide them with the wherewithal to keep their families intact and grounded, and contribute fully to the betterment and sustainability of their local communities.

The effectiveness of this program on multiple fronts has not gone unnoticed. ITC has garnered several awards for the e-Choupal program namely, the Corporate Social Responsibility Award in 2004 from the Tata Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), the Wharton Infosys Business Transformation Award (WIBTA) in 2004, and most recently the Stockholm Challenge Award in May 2006.

The goal of e-Choupal is to sustain, strengthen, and scale the operations of farmers with small agricultural holdings throughout rural India. The success of this system is earmarked by farmers staying in business, improving their operations, caring for their families, and contributing to the welfare of their local communities. This outcome scores well in following the sequence of localize, link, and globalize mentioned in last week’s posting by the same title.

And there is room for more! In a country of one billion people, three-quarters of which live in rural areas the efforts of ITC and e-Choupal only touch a narrow few. Reliance Retail, Ltd. is branching out with farming and retail and is committed to build an infrastructure that stabilizes small scale farming operations rather than destroy them; in direct competition to Reliance Retail, ITC is introducing Choupal Fresh.

Then, there are companies like Bharti that partnered with the Rothschild Group to form FieldFresh Foods. They are entering the next stage of scaling up agricultural production in rural India to supply global markets. Are Indian farmers sufficiently stabilized in their newfound capabilities to remain sustainable as small businesses in light of this rapid scaling?

Andy Mukherjee writing for Bloomberg.com paints companies Reliance, ITC, and Bharti with a common brush regarding their intentions for the Indian farmers in light of a worse fate – Wal-Mart. The title of his article “Indian Food Trade Lures Reliance, Bars Wal-Mart,”¹ suggests that a preferred strategy is keeping Wal-Mart at bay. Unfortunately, there are many paths that lead to premature globalization of food production at the farm level – even a seemingly healthy alliance between Bharti and Rothschild is fraught with difficulties!

Clearly, a Wal-Mart excursion into India would have a significant impact on the economics of farming and retailing in India. It poses a dilemma in whether to keep expanding the agricultural sector globally by building from a firm foundation of localized – linked – globalized farming operations, or prematurely opening the floodgates to global markets, compromising the system at local levels, and either becoming non-competitive due to excessive cost or entering the slippery slope of farm consolidation.

The title of a Knowledge@Wharton article, “Will Wal-Mart Succeed in India? Perhaps…But It Won’t Be Easy,”² suggests imminent conflict with Indian retail chains and the Indian government in their unwillingness to allow direct foreign investment into the retail industry. In response, Wal-Mart has formed a joint venture with Bharti. Will that be enough to overcome native resistance? And in “Wal-Mart Pushing India to Lift Ban on Global Chain Stores” published in The Hometown Advantage by The New Rules Project, the argument is raised that large non-Indian retailers like Wal-Mart are not good for the local Indian economy because their realm of interest is with absentee shareholders, not the people of India at the local level. Proceeding further while carrying this lack of concern for the impact one’s business model has on people whose livelihoods are placed squarely at risk is catamount to unethical business practice. In this case, it reverses the preferred approach of localize – link – globalize to drive globalization first and align linkages to suck profits and resources away without stabilizing the local economies first.

The world has endured this “global first” extraction / domination model for centuries. It doesn’t work. It’s time to give it up!

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Sunday, September 3, 2006

Original Bloomberg article, “Indian Food Trade Lures Reliance, Bars Wal-Mart,” is no longer available online ↩
Original Asia Media article, “Terms of Engagement for Wal-Mart India,” is no longer available online. ↩

Ground Truth and Multiple Truths

In Ross MacDonald’s last entry, “A Richer Concept of Ground Truth,” he discussed issues surrounding claims of truth and grounding as a way of opening up discussion about the concept of ground truth. In this entry Ross further explores the concept by discussing the related topics of multiple truths and their benefits, subjectivity and objectivity, and differences between open thinking and permissive processing of multiple truths. To help illustrate the ideas presented he will refer to the example of a developing ecotourism project in the spectacular mountains of Uttarakhand, Northern India. Take it away, Ross!

Uttaranchal Project

Uttaranchal, which translates as “Northern Mountains,” is a small state in the far north of India, bordering Tibet and Nepal. Site of the Ganges headwaters, the region has attracted many Hindus on annual pilgrimages, but, despite its alluring mountains and interesting culture, it is far less known on the international ecotourism scene. I am working with Manor Bhatt, currently a Ford Fellow at Columbia University’s Graduate School of International and Public Affairs while on leave from his senior position with the nongovernmental, environmentalist organization Shri Bhuvneshwari Mahila Ashram. Mr. Bhatt is a life-long resident of Uttaranchal.

The goal of the project is to support a sustainable, locally-owned and operated ecotourism industry based on a complicated formula of (a) building needed infrastructure of roads, water, sewer, reliable power; while at the same time (b) developing local capacity to provide eco-tourists with an enjoyable and stimulating experience; so as to (c) catalyze and support strong environmental and cultural protections; while (d) generating local income. Creating this synergy is expected to result in a sustainable tourist industry, reduction in resident’s out-migration for income, a curtailing of deforestation, maintenance of existing cultural practices and identities, and increased social and economic opportunities for residents of the region especially including women. My task is to design an on-going evaluation of the project and enhance local capacity to gather data related to project goals, to make sense of that data, and continuously improve the fledgling industry.

Multiple truths

A key part of the evaluation effort will be to recognize that multiple and conflicting truths will be abundant in the data — especially regarding some facets of the project, such as tourist satisfaction and awareness, changes in opportunities for women, and local’s assessments of tourism’s impact on local culture. Paradoxically, accepting the presence of multiple realities, even as they conflict, will actually contribute to the objectivity of the analysis. How can this be true? Aren’t individual truths each highly subjective?

That is exactly the point. Our impressions and experiences are obviously subjective, but in their collective and when considered intelligently, they yield insights and perspectives not available otherwise. In effect, because we are working in the realm of the social sciences, not in the physical sciences or religion, one more appropriately seeks truths with small “t’s.” Indeed, seeking these small “t” truths is not imprecise thinking, but actually a necessary precondition for the pursuit of objectivity. We strengthen objectivity by intelligently seeking and thinking about the many subjective realities present in the situation under study and especially by considering the perspectives of those who have been excluded or marginalized by a majority. For more detailed discussion see: Harding, Sandra. “Rethinking Standpoint Theory: ‘What Is Strong Objectivity?'” Feminist Epistemologies. Ed. Linda Alcoff and Elizabeth Petter. New York: Routledge, 1993. 49-82.

Three benefits of the pursuit of objectivity through multiple truths

Seeing objectivity as a pursuit rather than a stance has several advantages for the Utteranchal Project. Three of these benefits are introduced and briefly illustrated.

Accepting the value of multiple realities helps groups transcend the tendency to engage endlessly in debilitating arguments over whose truth is more true. Such arguments can only be “won” by invalidating other points of view. These arguments shut down any consideration of our commonality expressed in different ways. If, for example, 90% of eco-tourists report satisfaction with how they were treated by ecotourism providers, then aren’t the 10% who report being uncomfortable just plain wrong?
Compensates for the effects of more dominant personalities or more privileged participants disproportionately influencing an analysis. If, for example, the mayor of a village and a number of villagers claim that that local residents are economically benefiting from the project, but one segment of the population disagrees, then we need to ask who disagrees and why? Or consider the possibility that only 10% of the eco-tourists are women of color but, in comparison to the other 90% of eco-tourists, they report feeling much less comfortable in their interactions with trail guides, guest house hosts, and travel coordinators? While any process of averaging responses would bleach out this important information, consideration of it as a truth, even though it doesn’t fit with other truths, gives it a more important and preserved relevance.
Multiple realities means that it is possible to see common themes. Beyond the particular details of people’s stories about their experiences, are likely elements that recurrently echo each other. Identifying these elements and attempting to understand them involves respecting the different forms these elements take across stories. In this way a person’s individual experience is preserved, while at the same time people’s connections to each other are reinforced. An obvious outcome might be a recurring theme among eco-tourists of deep appreciation of the spectacular beauty of the region coupled with a deep awareness of the vulnerability of the ecosystem. The ways in which each individual experiences this conundrum will vary but the common humanity of the sentiment binds people together — a necessary basis for working for change.

Openness and permissiveness

This form of truth gathering is an open process but not a permissive one. Open means that one consciously remains in a state of “willing to consider” experiences, perspectives and ideas different than one’s own. Being open also means that we are aware that no matter how broad-minded we think we are, we still must recognize the limitations of one’s own views. Bringing other perspectives into our view broadens the horizon of possibilities. It is common to presume that openness means permissiveness — the blind acceptance of all perspectives or ideas as equally valid. Many presume that thinking critically about perspectives somehow violates the principle of openness. In fact, permissiveness is a type of poor thinking (presumption of equal merit) which actually short-circuits more beneficial analysis. Blind acceptance of all experiences shuts down, rather than opens up, understanding. For openness to have value, it must be accompanied by an acute mindfulness.

Originally posted to New Media Explorer by Steve Bosserman on Wednesday, January 25, 2006