In a rice paddy near Bako, Ethiopia, farmers work diligently, though rice is not native to the region. This crop is among those favored by large agricultural corporations, highlighting a shift in global farming practices driven by technology and industrial interests.
Tech Firms and AI Farming Tools 'Playing with the Food System', Warns Thinktank
Leading food security experts have issued a stark warning, asserting that tech companies and industrial agriculture are "playing with the food system" by leveraging artificial intelligence and algorithms to undermine farmers' autonomy in determining what the world consumes. Companies such as Google, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, and Alibaba are collaborating with industrial agriculture firms to shape crop selection and farming methods, according to a recent report from the thinktank International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES-Food).
Top-Down Approach to Farming Systems
The experts describe this dynamic as a "top-down" approach, where large corporations dictate what farmers should grow, often prioritizing the most productive and profitable crops. Pat Mooney, a Canadian author and agriculture expert who contributed to the "Head in the Cloud" report, emphasized the risks involved. "Companies are playing with the food system, and we can't afford to have that played with," he stated, noting that these entities tend to focus narrowly on five key crops: corn, rice, wheat, soya beans, and potatoes.
Mooney illustrated this bias with an example: "Their advice is going to be: 'Well, we don't know about your using teff in Ethiopia – we never heard about teff – but we do know about how to use corn in Ethiopia, so we'll advise you on the ways you can use corn, and we know how to link corn to pesticides, because that's our expertise.'" This approach risks sidelining locally adapted crops like teff, a grain traditionally cultivated in Ethiopia for generations.
Risks of a Globalized Food System
Farmers face the danger of being locked into a globalized system where they are compelled to purchase seeds, machinery, and chemical inputs from industrial companies, rather than growing crops suited to their local environments. Mooney added that the globalized food system has already demonstrated vulnerability to shocks, such as the climate crisis or conflicts like the war in Ukraine. "The more global the system is, the harder it is to guarantee that you're actually going to have it work, and food security is something which really needs to be as local as possible," he explained.
He cautioned against further entanglement in this broken system: "Don't lock yourself into a global system which is broken and can't be repaired. Why would we make it even more globalized than before and more dependent upon multinational companies that are operating out of Silicon Valley?"
How AI and Algorithms Influence Farming
Tech companies utilize algorithms and AI models fed with data collected from farmers, as well as tools like satellite and drone sensors that monitor climate conditions and soil health. This information is then used to advise farmers on crop selection, such as suggesting seeds based on soil moisture levels. However, Mooney warned that these recommendations are likely biased toward crops in which the companies have a vested interest, requiring farmers to buy associated seeds, equipment, and inputs like fertilizers.
The report highlights that digital tools are often portrayed as innovative, attracting the attention of policymakers and investors. This means that even if farmers are hesitant to adopt tech company advice, it could be promoted by governments as the forward path. The market for digital tools in farming was valued at $30 billion last year and is projected to reach $84 billion by 2034, according to Fortune Business Insights. Additionally, the World Bank has financed $1.15 billion in loans for digital agriculture projects, and the EU has spent €200 million on research in this area.
Calls for a Bottom-Up Approach
Lim Li Ching, co-chair of IPES-Food, argued that "farming by algorithm" is not aligned with farmers' desires and advocated for a bottom-up approach that prioritizes their knowledge and needs. "Innovation that actually works for people has to be grounded in their realities ... [It should support them] as guardians and stewards of agricultural biodiversity," she said. "[We need] innovations that genuinely support sustainability, that empower farmers, that are governed locally and that can strengthen agroecological practices and not entrench further industrial agriculture or monocultures or a heavily chemical-driven agriculture."
Examples of such community-led initiatives already exist, such as in Peru, where families protect hundreds of potato varieties; in China, where farmers conserve seeds; and in Tanzania, where social media is used to share information on weather conditions and market prices. Mooney emphasized that policymakers should focus on funding research with local farmers and supporting their innovations. "Food security is something which really needs to be as local as possible, which is the advantage of agroecology: you don't lock yourself into a global system which is broken and can't be repaired."
Google, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, and Alibaba were approached for comment on these concerns.
