Versions Compared

Version Old Version 1 New Version Current
Changes made by

Vineet Singh

Vineet Singh

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Page Properties
label

Status

Status
colourYellow
titleIn progress

Impact

Status
colourRed
titleHigh

Driver

Vineet Singh Ashu Sikri (Unlicensed)

Approver

Rikinrikin (Unlicensed)

Contributors

Ashu Sikri Lokesh Garg (Unlicensed) Razak K M 

Informed

saureen (Unlicensed) Razak K M

Due date

Outcome

...

Option 1: KDE

Option 2: MRV

Option 3: AgNext

Option 4: KDE + CoCo

Option 5: Fasal

Description

FPO uses aggregated data to negotiate w buyers

VRP gathers tracks practices and other indicators, and this is used to estimate GHG emissions

Agnext generates a quality assessment report, DG accesses the report and sends farmers advisories detailing how they can improve their grade

PG officer gathered data shared with VRP to improve production practices

Fasal IoT sensors gather a bunch of farm specific data and use it to deliver advisories

Data Flow

Farmer → PG officer → FPO → Buyer (aggregated)

Farmer → VRP → DG → DNDC → DG → JEEViKA (in the form of an aggregated dashboard)

Farmer → AgNext → DG → Farmer

Farmer → PG officer → FPO → DG → VRP → farmer

Fasal (through IoT) → farmer → Third Party

Pros and cons

(plus)

Low hanging fruit

Value to farmers immediate and tangible

(minus)

More like app permissions than data wallet

Seems like a force fit

(plus)

Individual farmer’s data

Multiple stakeholders and processing

(minus)

Value prop to farmers not concrete today

Added complexity

(plus)

Individual farmer’s data

Already being piloted and interesting potential (advisory)

(minus)

Who plays what role? Not concrete as of now

Added complexity

(plus)

Individual farmer’s data

Low hanging fruit as both systems in DG

(minus)

Value prop to farmers not immediate and tangible

No external party

(plus)

Individual farmer’s data

Maybe the use case in place already

(minus)

IoT streaming data is unchartered territory

Value prop

Estimated effort

Status
colourGreen
titleLow

Status
colourRed
titleLarge

Status
colourRed
titlelarge

Status
colourYellow
titlemedium

Status
colourRed
titlelarge

Ratings top three (A:Ashu, V: Vineet)

A: 1

V: 2

A: 3

V: 3

A: 2

V: 1

Action items

Dashboard created by DG which is giving details by VRP/ Video dissemination (form extension department): district, village, FPO, Average yield, crops, # farmers below average, action

optional: district, village, FPO, farmer, yield, request (about input/ improving yield),

can see farmer details who are below the average and contact them.

If we have CoCo data of that farmer, we can probably show that somehow (not initially).

  •  Value prop/ user journey

Outcomes:

  1. some significant percentage of farmers give consent that I want to get contacted for XYZ thing (input, market, disease management) and want to share the data for same

  2. X number of new farmers got contacted by VRP

  3. Out of X, Y% found the video or the advisory info relevant and what they wanted

  4. Overall A farmers with B % who have found this useful

Fallback:

  1. We go back on option 1 - covered in the effort

Process/ User journey:

  1. UI/ UX part

    1. basic wireframe will help

  2. informed consent works

  3. technical stuff - OTP, validating etc

  4. Roll out and process

Feasibility:

  1. Where?

    1. VRPs to be mobilised

      1. Bihar: Jeevika has good cadre

      2. Odisha: CRPs good

    2. FPOs have shown some interest - there is a resource institution attached

      1. Bihar - good FPOs

      2. AP: not sure

      3. Odisha: CYSD - good cadre

  2. When?

    1. Crops/ season:

      1. Bihar: Paddy/ Litchi: June/July

      3. Pulses/ millets: October

  3. Who are the stakeholders we should speak to?

    1. Program alignment

      1. Bihar - Jeevika

      2. Odisha - already interest from Nabard

Outcome