In the last 40 years, India’s agricultural productivity has increased by 40 per cent to 500 per cent.&nbsp;

Availability of food, however, still remains a major concern because of poor packaging, inefficient traders, absence of sheltered storage and many more factors.&nbsp;

Among the many frequently faced challenges in the Indian food supply chain, the high volatility in the wholesale market ranks number one.&nbsp;

Owing to the massive size of the supply chain, quality control is another big hurdle. Seasonality and availability are also handicaps, although relatively smaller.&nbsp;

There are limited consolidators available who work with contractual rates; this poses another threat to the fluency of the chain.

There is no differentiation between the product cost and logistics cost, which results in an increase in the total cost of the produces. There are other major issues that impact the supply chain and food quality.

The fragmented nature of the food industry is a major obstacle in the entire supply chain as it consists of organised players like hotel chains and catering businesses, and unorganised players such as small food joints and restaurants. This results in an uneven volume demand and supply pattern.&nbsp;

Also, the involvement of third-party vendors in the supply chain creates a disruption in the flow, resulting in a price increase.

Sharp fluctuations in food price inflation have raised questions about the functioning of the Indian food supply chain itself. There is no standard tool or method to assess the fluctuation rate and predict future patterns. Hence the practice of forward-buying is not popular in India.

The supply chain’s lead time in India is impacted to a large extent by the absence of technology. The manual labour system in the country increases the cost of importing goods, e.g., the cost of importing a container in India is $500 as opposed to the $300 in foreign ports.

Only 6 per cent of the entire logistics network falls under the organised category in India. The lack of organised logistics acts as a barrier in the transportation of produce from the farms to the consumers.&nbsp;

Though the government has introduced 100 per cent FDI in the logistics sector and many organised players like DHL and TNT, among others, are coming in the market, the reach is limited only to the commercial areas. This is due to the poor infrastructure in the remote areas of the country. In India, the cold chain has not matured enough to procure products directly from the farmers; it is instead supplied by the wholesalers.&nbsp;

This results in many perishable products like exotic vegetables/fruits or dairy products losing their quality because of the time it takes to reach the consumers.&nbsp;

In turn, it impacts the farmers and the pricing of the product. The absence of private players has become one of the root causes of this poor structure.

One of the ways to curb the problem is to introduce supply chain partners into the system to address end-to-end delivery. The concept of having a single vendor is at a nascent stage and the government must encourage this concept and make way for the players by easing norms.

In India, some compliance is lost in the traditional route of buying from traders and wholesalers. Besides, there are many big players such as Big Basket, HyperPure by Zomato etc, who are present in the retail industry and are gradually foraying into the B2B space.&nbsp;

Here’s how they help solve some of the challenges. The sustainability of their business model is hinged on direct national sourcing capability and Farm to Fork models for fruit and vegetable chains and backward integration to mills and manufacturers for staples, therefore, eliminating middlemen and distributors.&nbsp;

The best infrastructure for storage, sorting and grading is needed. It is important to leverage technology-enabled end-to-end supply chain capabilities to optimise logistics, track fulfilment rates and share live dashboards.

The ability to forecast market fluctuations is a must. All these challenges result in higher cost and poor quality. Incorporating the aforementioned solutions can help smoothen the process and make things beneficial for both the stakeholders and the customers.&nbsp;

 
(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-challenges-of-streamlining-food-supply-chain-management-2764954">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

In the last 40 years, India’s agricultural productivity has increased by 40 per cent to 500 per cent. Availability of food, however, still remains a major concern because of poor packaging, inefficient traders, absence of sheltered storage and many more factors.

In the last 40 years, India’s agricultural productivity has increased by 40 per cent to 500 per cent. Availability of food, however, still remains a major concern because of poor packaging, inefficient traders, absence of sheltered storage and many more factors. Among the many frequently faced challenges in the Indian food supply chain, the high volatility in the wholesale market ranks number one. Owing to the massive size of the supply chain, quality control is another big hurdle. Seasonality and availability are also handicaps, although relatively smaller. There are limited consolidators available who work with contractual rates; this poses another threat to the fluency of the chain. There is no differentiation between the product cost and logistics cost, which results in an increase in the total cost of the produces. There are other major issues that impact the supply chain and food quality. The fragmented nature of the food industry is a major obstacle in the entire supply chain as it consists of organised players like hotel chains and catering businesses, and unorganised players such as small food joints and restaurants. This results in an uneven volume demand and supply pattern. Also, the involvement of third-party vendors in the supply chain creates a disruption in the flow, resulting in a price increase. Sharp fluctuations in food price inflation have raised questions about the functioning of the Indian food supply chain itself. There is no standard tool or method to assess the fluctuation rate and predict future patterns. Hence the practice of forward-buying is not popular in India. The supply chain’s lead time in India is impacted to a large extent by the absence of technology. The manual labour system in the country increases the cost of importing goods, e.g., the cost of importing a container in India is $500 as opposed to the $300 in foreign ports. Only 6 per cent of the entire logistics network falls under the organised category in India. The lack of organised logistics acts as a barrier in the transportation of produce from the farms to the consumers. Though the government has introduced 100 per cent FDI in the logistics sector and many organised players like DHL and TNT, among others, are coming in the market, the reach is limited only to the commercial areas. This is due to the poor infrastructure in the remote areas of the country. In India, the cold chain has not matured enough to procure products directly from the farmers; it is instead supplied by the wholesalers. This results in many perishable products like exotic vegetables/fruits or dairy products losing their quality because of the time it takes to reach the consumers. In turn, it impacts the farmers and the pricing of the product. The absence of private players has become one of the root causes of this poor structure. One of the ways to curb the problem is to introduce supply chain partners into the system to address end-to-end delivery. The concept of having a single vendor is at a nascent stage and the government must encourage this concept and make way for the players by easing norms. In India, some compliance is lost in the traditional route of buying from traders and wholesalers. Besides, there are many big players such as Big Basket, HyperPure by Zomato etc, who are present in the retail industry and are gradually foraying into the B2B space. Here’s how they help solve some of the challenges. The sustainability of their business model is hinged on direct national sourcing capability and Farm to Fork models for fruit and vegetable chains and backward integration to mills and manufacturers for staples, therefore, eliminating middlemen and distributors. The best infrastructure for storage, sorting and grading is needed. It is important to leverage technology-enabled end-to-end supply chain capabilities to optimise logistics, track fulfilment rates and share live dashboards. The ability to forecast market fluctuations is a must. All these challenges result in higher cost and poor quality. Incorporating the aforementioned solutions can help smoothen the process and make things beneficial for both the stakeholders and the customers. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Availability of food remains a major concern

By Michel Pimbert and Colin Anderson

It is widely agreed that today’s global agriculture system is a social and environmental failure. Business, as usual, is no longer an option: biodiversity loss and nitrogen pollution are exceeding planetary limits, and catastrophic risks of climate change demand immediate action.

Most concede that there is an urgent need to radically transform our food systems. But the proposed innovations for more sustainable food systems are drastically different. Which we choose will have long-lasting effects on human society and the planet.

Suggested innovations in food systems can be broadly understood as either seeking to conform with – or to transform – the status quo.

A technological future

Some want to keep the agriculture industry as close to existing practices as possible. This is true of the increasing number of corporate and financial actors who seek to solve the food crisis by developing new technologies. These technologies are envisaged as being part of what is being called the “fourth industrial revolution” (4IR). The “answer” here is thought to lie in a fusion of technologies that blurs the lines between physical, digital and biological domains.

For example, the World Economic Forum is currently supporting agricultural transitions in 21 countries through its “New Vision for Agriculture” initiative. This initiative supports “innovation ecosystems” to re-engineer food systems based on “12 transforming technologies”. In this imagined future, next-generation biotechnologies will re-engineer plants and animals. Precision farming will optimise the use of water and pesticides. Global food systems will rely on smart robots, blockchain and the internet of things to manufacture synthetic foods for personalised nutrition.

Like previous green revolution technologies in agriculture, this effort is designed by and for powerful agricultural giants. These technological innovations reinforce the concentration of political and economic power in the hands of a small number of corporations. Indeed, the latter has a growing monopoly control over the “12 transforming technologies” protected by patents.

Most notably, the spread of these technologies will expand the technosphere at the expense of the biosphere. Flying robots will pollinate crops instead of living bees. Automated machines will replace farmers’ work on soil preparation, seeding, weeding, fertility, pest control and harvesting of crops.

These hi-tech innovations radically depart from most farming practices. They are moving us towards an increasingly people-less food system. Yet they show a remarkable continuity with the logic of capitalist accumulation – hence their staying power despite their significant risks.

The spread of automated, de-localised and digitalised production and commercialisation of food is part of the “financialisation” of the global food system. Financial markets play an increasing role in controlling food systems from a distance. This generates huge social and human risks. For example, the significant growth in the sale and purchase of financial products linked to food commodities was one of the determining factors in the 2008 world food crisis.

Another option

But there is an alternative to this future. Agroecology involves the application of ecological principles for the design and management of sustainable agroecosystems. Our research on agroecology focuses on how it can contribute to food sovereignty, which emphasises the democratisation of food systems. Agroecology’s contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals is now recognised.

In contrast to the technological vision described above, agroecological innovations promote circular systems that involve recycling, reuse and combining resources to reduce dependency on external inputs, in particular, fossil fuels. They mimic natural cycles and the functional diversity of natural ecosystems.

Farming systems are designed in a way that is based on beneficial interactions between plants, animals and environments. Trees and shrubs might be planted amongst or around crops, say. Or two or more crops might be grown in proximity. Agroecology reduces the dependence of food producers on expensive external inputs, distant commodity markets and patented technologies. This is achieved by relying on appropriate biodiversity to ward off pests and increase farm yields.

At broader scales, agroecology involves circular systems that combine food and energy production with water and waste management. Pollution is minimised and synergies achieved by carefully clustering industries into functional wholes. The re-localisation of production and consumption within territories enhances local economic regeneration and sustainability.

Agroecological innovations in transitions to sustainable food systems are being driven largely from the bottom up by civil society, social movements and allied researchers. In this context, priorities for innovations are ones that increase citizen control for food sovereignty and decentralise power. This is in direct contrast to the monopoly control enabled by 4IR technologies.

A democratic debate

Government, civil society and private sector representatives will soon meet in Rome at the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation to discuss the future of farming. Who controls the global governance of innovation will be a hotly debated topic.

But given these highly contested views on innovations for food and agriculture, it is vital that everyone is able to exercise their right to have a say on the future of their food supply. Deliberative and inclusive processes such as citizens’ juries, peoples’ assemblies and community-led participatory processes are urgently needed to decide priorities for food and agricultural innovations. This is all the more important in today’s context of rapid global change and uncertainty.

So. Do you want to live in a world in which artificial food is produced by intelligent robots and corporations that put profits before people? Or one where agroecological innovations ensure we can nourish ourselves and our communities in a fair, ecologically regenerative, and culturally rich way?

 
(Michel Pimbert Professor and Director, Centre for Agroecology, Water and Resilience, Coventry University; &nbsp;Colin Anderson&nbsp;Senior Research Fellow, Coventry University)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-battle-for-the-future-of-farming-what-you-need-to-know-106805">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

By Michel Pimbert and Colin Anderson It is widely agreed that today’s global agriculture system is a social and environmental failure. Business, as usual, is no longer an option: biodiversity loss and nitrogen pollution are exceeding planetary limits, and catastrophic risks of climate change demand immediate action.

By Michel Pimbert and Colin Anderson It is widely agreed that today’s global agriculture system is a social and environmental failure. Business, as usual, is no longer an option: biodiversity loss and nitrogen pollution are exceeding planetary limits, and catastrophic risks of climate change demand immediate action. Most concede that there is an urgent need to radically transform our food systems. But the proposed innovations for more sustainable food systems are drastically different. Which we choose will have long-lasting effects on human society and the planet. Suggested innovations in food systems can be broadly understood as either seeking to conform with – or to transform – the status quo. A technological future Some want to keep the agriculture industry as close to existing practices as possible. This is true of the increasing number of corporate and financial actors who seek to solve the food crisis by developing new technologies. These technologies are envisaged as being part of what is being called the “fourth industrial revolution” (4IR). The “answer” here is thought to lie in a fusion of technologies that blurs the lines between physical, digital and biological domains. For example, the World Economic Forum is currently supporting agricultural transitions in 21 countries through its “New Vision for Agriculture” initiative. This initiative supports “innovation ecosystems” to re-engineer food systems based on “12 transforming technologies”. In this imagined future, next-generation biotechnologies will re-engineer plants and animals. Precision farming will optimise the use of water and pesticides. Global food systems will rely on smart robots, blockchain and the internet of things to manufacture synthetic foods for personalised nutrition. Like previous green revolution technologies in agriculture, this effort is designed by and for powerful agricultural giants. These technological innovations reinforce the concentration of political and economic power in the hands of a small number of corporations. Indeed, the latter has a growing monopoly control over the “12 transforming technologies” protected by patents. Most notably, the spread of these technologies will expand the technosphere at the expense of the biosphere. Flying robots will pollinate crops instead of living bees. Automated machines will replace farmers’ work on soil preparation, seeding, weeding, fertility, pest control and harvesting of crops. These hi-tech innovations radically depart from most farming practices. They are moving us towards an increasingly people-less food system. Yet they show a remarkable continuity with the logic of capitalist accumulation – hence their staying power despite their significant risks. The spread of automated, de-localised and digitalised production and commercialisation of food is part of the “financialisation” of the global food system. Financial markets play an increasing role in controlling food systems from a distance. This generates huge social and human risks. For example, the significant growth in the sale and purchase of financial products linked to food commodities was one of the determining factors in the 2008 world food crisis. Another option But there is an alternative to this future. Agroecology involves the application of ecological principles for the design and management of sustainable agroecosystems. Our research on agroecology focuses on how it can contribute to food sovereignty, which emphasises the democratisation of food systems. Agroecology’s contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals is now recognised. In contrast to the technological vision described above, agroecological innovations promote circular systems that involve recycling, reuse and combining resources to reduce dependency on external inputs, in particular, fossil fuels. They mimic natural cycles and the functional diversity of natural ecosystems. Farming systems are designed in a way that is based on beneficial interactions between plants, animals and environments. Trees and shrubs might be planted amongst or around crops, say. Or two or more crops might be grown in proximity. Agroecology reduces the dependence of food producers on expensive external inputs, distant commodity markets and patented technologies. This is achieved by relying on appropriate biodiversity to ward off pests and increase farm yields. At broader scales, agroecology involves circular systems that combine food and energy production with water and waste management. Pollution is minimised and synergies achieved by carefully clustering industries into functional wholes. The re-localisation of production and consumption within territories enhances local economic regeneration and sustainability. Agroecological innovations in transitions to sustainable food systems are being driven largely from the bottom up by civil society, social movements and allied researchers. In this context, priorities for innovations are ones that increase citizen control for food sovereignty and decentralise power. This is in direct contrast to the monopoly control enabled by 4IR technologies. A democratic debate Government, civil society and private sector representatives will soon meet in Rome at the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation to discuss the future of farming. Who controls the global governance of innovation will be a hotly debated topic. But given these highly contested views on innovations for food and agriculture, it is vital that everyone is able to exercise their right to have a say on the future of their food supply. Deliberative and inclusive processes such as citizens’ juries, peoples’ assemblies and community-led participatory processes are urgently needed to decide priorities for food and agricultural innovations. This is all the more important in today’s context of rapid global change and uncertainty. So. Do you want to live in a world in which artificial food is produced by intelligent robots and corporations that put profits before people? Or one where agroecological innovations ensure we can nourish ourselves and our communities in a fair, ecologically regenerative, and culturally rich way? (Michel Pimbert Professor and Director, Centre for Agroecology, Water and Resilience, Coventry University; Colin Anderson Senior Research Fellow, Coventry University) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The battle for the future of farming: What you need to know

farming-in-india

Farming In India, News on Farming In India, stories on Farming In India, articles on Farming In India, Farming In India stories at Wion, Farming In India news, Farming In India latest news

farming in-india

Availability of food remains a major concern

The battle for the future of farming: What you need to know