Digitalization as Revolution? Technology and Power in Agriculture

• In Event: Environmental Activism and Politics

Abstract

In times of pandemic, agriculture is of interest, not only because the COVID 19 pandemic demonstrated the vulnerability of global agricultural and food value chains. Current agro-industrial production is also a major cause of biodiversity loss, contributing to the emergence of zoonotic diseases such as coronavirus. In addition, agriculture contributes to further socio-ecological crises through its greenhouse gas emissions or the over-fertilization of soils and its serious impact on freshwater. Digital technologies are increasingly discussed here as a means to promote a more sustainable agriculture and widely hailed as the next agricultural revolution that will change how food is produced. Against this background, this paper asks the question: Can digitalization really be understood as a revolution in food and agricultural production? Are existing social relations and economic and political inequalities reinforced or revolutionized by it?
‘Smart farming’, ‘agriculture 4.0’ or ‘digital agriculture’ are to a large extent interchangeable terms used to describe the phenomenon of an increased use of data-related technologies in the farming and food production process. These technologies, including big data-based applications, artificial intelligence and automation, digital agricultural platforms and the deployment of sensors, drones and satellite imagery, are increasingly making their way into agriculture across the globe. Both corporate actors and political institutions argue that digitalization offers the solution to feeding a growing world population, while at the same time mitigating the negative environmental and climate consequences of (industrial) agriculture. Farm machinery equipment companies and input producers claim that digitalization is making their products ‘climate smart’. Agri-food corporations have successfully pushed a ‘climate-smart narrative’ into UN institutions such as the FAO. This is mirrored in the recent announcement by member states of the Global Forum for Food and Agriculture that they will set up an International Digital Council for Food and Agriculture under the auspices of the FAO. The EU has also adapted this approach to digital agriculture, stating in a declaration that “Digital technologies (…) have the potential to increase farm efficiency while improving economic and environmental sustainability” (European Commission 2019).This picture is an affirmative and positive one, generally conflict-free and with few if any downsides. However, little is yet known about the social sustainability dimensions of the digitalization of agriculture. Some civil society organizations adopt a critical attitude, drawing attention to problematic impacts, e.g. on labor relations and social justice. These organizations see digitalization as a threat to food sovereignty and the livelihoods of smallholders reinforcing devastating effects of the agro-industrial model. The academic literature presents a more nuanced picture. Studies highlight the social and economic opportunities, while acknowledging that digitalization also entails challenges and risks. Only few studies examine the social impacts and distributive dimensions linked to the adoption of digital technologies in agriculture.
This paper addresses this gap by bringing together political economy and critical data studies in specifically analyzing the social impacts of digitalization in agriculture. It is based on a systematic literature review of 84 scientific publications (following PRISMA procedures) and the analysis of 280 digital products and services used in agriculture, based on a content analysis of 53 industry reports. The analysis shows that there are significant power asymmetries in digital technology development; in the distribution of benefits from the use of digital technologies; in sovereignty over data, hardware and digital infrastructure; in skills and knowledge and also in problem definition and problem-solving capacities. It concludes that digitalization in agriculture is not a ‘revolution’; by contrast, digital technologies mirror and reproduce existing inequalities and ‘context-shaping’ and ‘conduct-shaping’ power relations (Colin Hay 1999). The article paper with reflections on how digitalization should be critically assessed and socially and politically embedded and regulated, not only in agriculture. This is even more so important in post-pandemic times when digitalization is increasingly seen as a solution to many problems.

Author

• Sarah Hackfort, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin