Burgess COMMENTARY

Peter Burgess

Using ICT tools to cut carbon emissions and improve agriculture Information and communication technologies for climate change and agriculture are developing fast, but how do they fit into the big picture? Affordable technologies that can reduce greenhouse gases and increase productivity in agriculture are becoming more accessible. Photograph: Dan Chung for the Guardian Greenhouse gases from agriculture account for more than 10% of total emissions globally, roughly equivalent to the entire global transport sector. Meanwhile, it is estimated that agricultural production will need to increase by about 70% by 2050 to keep pace with global population growth. What's more, the real impacts of climate change on the agricultural sector are likely going to be hardest felt in many of those countries whose people rely on agriculture most for their livelihoods. In sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia, for example, some estimates show a reduction in the productivity of most major food crops as a result of changes to the climate over the next 40 years. While this may sound like a doom and gloom scenario, affordable technologies that have the potential to reduce greenhouse gases and increase productivity in agriculture are becoming more widely available. I am referring not to agricultural technologies — although those certainly play a role — but to information and communications technologies, like the mobile phone, video and radio. 'Climate-smart' methods of agriculture, such as conservation agriculture, agroforestry and others already exist. The challenge is that not all farmers know about them, there is no single prescription, and traditional practices can often die hard, particularly when you are working with small margins and taking risks could spell utter ruin for your family. So how do information and communication technologies change this? They make it easier to share locally relevant information on improved techniques and to provide time-specific information and recommendations (such as weather forecasts, and when to do what). As mobile phone penetration rates continue to grow at a rapid rate throughout the globe, farmers are gaining access to a growing number of agricultural information services both through SMS and voice. In some cases, these services charge farmers a fee for access to agricultural content and advice, while others provide it for free through donor subsidies, or by selling advertising and providing other services, such as user surveys. Many devices are accessed directly by the farmer while others rely on a trusted community intermediary. In addition to mobile phone services, a growing number of agricultural organisations and agribusinesses have been using low-cost video equipment to create locally-made extension videos to share the stories of farmers who have switched to more sustainable practices with their peers in other communities. And not to be outdone, by coupling mobile phone access with radio access, interactive radio programmes are being developed that are transforming rural radio from a one-way information output to a two-way exchange of sharing and learning. Certainly, not all services are created equally, and the depth of research on impact is still fairly shallow, but the research to date has been promising. This is particularly the case when we look at the rate of adoption of new practices. To be sure, not all the agricultural content providers are promoting environmentally sustainable farming methods. But the fact that these technologies are leading to changes in agricultural practice over control groups without access to these services is telling. Here's a selection of some of what we do know: research by the Grameen Foundation on its Community Knowledge Worker programme in Uganda, which shares agricultural content via mobile phone, found a significant and positive impact in the use of organic manure within communities with access to the scheme; while research by Farm Radio International found that having a radio station call out to farmers can increase adoption rates by up to 14%; and a pilot study on the impact of low-cost video on agricultural practices in India found video to be up to 10 times more cost effective on a cost per adoption basis than traditional extension methods alone (although more recent analysis by Digital Green is showing slightly lower, but still significant impact). The potential impact of ICT on its own is not enough to overcome the global climate and food security challenges over the coming decades. It is important to remember that while the technologies can support the transition to more sustainable agricultural practices, they still require someone to create high quality and relevant content, and someone to pay for the dissemination of that information. Compared with the state of agricultural extension in much of the world prior to the ready availability of these technologies, however, there is cause for optimism that just as technology has enabled the rapid spread of entertainment, it may also facilitate a faster transition to environmentally friendlier forms of agriculture in the places that need them most. And while that alone won't solve the problem, it is certainly a helpful start. • To learn more about how ICT is being used well in agriculture, visit the FAO E-Agriculture community, The World Bank's ICT in agriculture site, GSMA's magri page, and the many USaid topical briefing papers and toolkits on interactive radio and low-cost video. Josh Woodard is a project manager at FHI 360 where he manages USAid's Facet project, which focuses on ICT and agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more articles like this direct to your inbox, sign up free to become a member of the Global Development Professionals Network