Advertise with us
Subscribe
Home Blog Page 58

African Farmers Need Access to Synthetic Fertilizer Now

agrimachinery
-
0
African Farmers Need Access to Synthetic Fertilizer Now

Authors

Vijaya Ramachandran,  Saloni Shah and  Alex Smith

If you were to listen to some Western commentators on agriculture, you would think that the worst thing that farmers could do is increase their use of fertilizer.

Synthetic fertilizer, after all, is a fossil fuel product. Nutrient run-off is a grave threat to fisheries, waterways, and more.

Above all, commentators emphasize, synthetic fertilizers put agriculture out of harmony with the “natural” soils that have long nourished the families of subsistence farmers and smallholders who sell their cereals and produce in urban and suburban markets.

But synthetic fertilizer has significant upsides, too. Despite short-term ecological challenges, and dependence on fossil fuels for its production, the benefits of increased synthetic fertilizer use—higher farm yields, reduced dependency on imports, improved food security, and lowered pressure on forested and other wild landscapes—outweigh the costs. Synthetic fertilizer also has counterintuitive climate and land use benefits.

Africa’s agricultural yields lag the rest of the world, leaving it dependent on costly imports. Between 2016 and 2018, as much as 85 percent of Africa’s food was imported. Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, about a third of Africa’s wheat came from either Russia or Ukraine. Some countries, like Congo and Tanzania, relied on Ukraine and Russia for more than 70 percent of their wheat supply.

Higher price levels after the invasion have meant that consumers and governments are paying significantly more for food. High food prices are an enormous burden for individuals, families, and communities who already experience high levels of poverty and food insecurity. Nigeria’s inflation rate so far in 2022 is at 20.8 percent, Ethiopia’s is 30.2 percent, and Sudan’s sits at a whopping 148.8 percent.

A recent United Nations World Food Program report highlighted 19 “hunger hotspots” in 2022, of which 16 were in Africa. Topping this dismal list was the Democratic Republic of Congo, which has seen a 25 percent increase in its food insecure population (bringing the total to almost 26 million people).

Ethiopia and Nigeria follow, with around 20 million food insecure people each. In the 16 “hunger hotspots” alone—not even considering food insecure populations elsewhere in Africa—about 114 million people face shortages, high prices, and hunger. There are more people in Africa facing food insecurity than the entire population of Russia.

In 2020, Nigeria imported just under 1 million metric tons of Russian wheat. In the same year, Nigerian producers harvested about 55,000 metric tons of wheat from approximately 50,000 hectares of cropland, for an average yield of just about 1.1 tons of wheat per hectare.

While it would be nearly impossible for Nigeria to raise its average wheat yields by enough to completely replace Russian wheat imports, simply matching Russian average yields of just under 3 tons per hectare could offset more than 10 percent of imported Russian wheat without expanding cropland.

Although 10 percent might sound small, an additional one million tons of Nigerian-grown wheat would go far to reduce the cost of food in Nigeria, alleviate short-term food insecurity from food supply shocks, and generate much-needed revenue for agricultural communities.

Fertilizer prices are high in Africa, burdening farmers who already struggle to pay for nutrient inputs. Increases in fertilizer production capacity in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Nigeria may relieve some of the stress of high import costs but small gains in the short term are not enough.

Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, countries such as Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Mauritania purchased between 20 and 50 percent of their fertilizer from Russia. They must now compete with other nations to purchase agricultural nutrients in a diminished market with inflated prices.

To address food insecurity while limiting cropland expansion, African governments must increase fertilizer production capacity and drive greater adoption of fertilizer by lowering costs for farmers.

Using synthetic fertilizer has high returns

The nineteenth century was marked by periodic soil fertility crises. Industrialization in Europe put greater pressure on rural farmlands to feed growing urban centers, while removing key nutrients—namely, human waste—from the landscape. Phosphate rocks, seabird guano, and other nutrient dense products were added to farmlands, but demand led to skyrocketing prices and intermittent food supply disruptions.

Although never reaching a breaking point of complete loss of soil fertility, the cyclical fertility patterns worried agriculturalists, soil scientists, and social theorists. In some cases even, it drove nations to military conflict over the agricultural nutrient trade.

It wasn’t until Fritz Haber demonstrated his novel process for synthesizing ammonia in 1909, and Carl Bosch industrialized that process a few years later, that things changed.

In 1913, when the Haber-Bosch process was first implemented at an industrial scale, the world population was around 1.8 billion. Today, the world population is just over 8 billion.

Few technological innovations have had as significant a contribution to feeding a growing population than the Haber-Bosch process, which increased the use of synthetic fertilizer across the world. In fact, without synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, we would not be able to feed over 8 billion people.If you were to listen to some Western commentators on agriculture, you would think that the worst thing that farmers could do is increase their use of fertilizer. Synthetic fertilizer, after all, is a fossil fuel product. Nutrient run-off is a grave threat to fisheries, waterways, and more. Above all, commentators emphasize, synthetic fertilizers put agriculture out of harmony with the “natural” soils that have long nourished the families of subsistence farmers and smallholders who sell their cereals and produce in urban and suburban markets. But synthetic fertilizer has significant upsides, too. Despite short-term ecological challenges, and dependence on fossil fuels for its production, the benefits of increased synthetic fertilizer use—higher farm yields, reduced dependency on imports, improved food security, and lowered pressure on forested and other wild landscapes—outweigh the costs. Synthetic fertilizer also has counterintuitive climate and land use benefits. Africa’s agricultural yields lag the rest of the world, leaving it dependent on costly imports. Between 2016 and 2018, as much as 85 percent of Africa’s food was imported. Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, about a third of Africa’s wheat came from either Russia or Ukraine. Some countries, like Congo and Tanzania, relied on Ukraine and Russia for more than 70 percent of their wheat supply. Higher price levels after the invasion have meant that consumers and governments are paying significantly more for food. High food prices are an enormous burden for individuals, families, and communities who already experience high levels of poverty and food insecurity. Nigeria’s inflation rate so far in 2022 is at 20.8 percent, Ethiopia’s is 30.2 percent, and Sudan’s sits at a whopping 148.8 percent. A recent United Nations World Food Program report highlighted 19 “hunger hotspots” in 2022, of which 16 were in Africa. Topping this dismal list was the Democratic Republic of Congo, which has seen a 25 percent increase in its food insecure population (bringing the total to almost 26 million people). Ethiopia and Nigeria follow, with around 20 million food insecure people each. In the 16 “hunger hotspots” alone—not even considering food insecure populations elsewhere in Africa—about 114 million people face shortages, high prices, and hunger. There are more people in Africa facing food insecurity than the entire population of Russia. In 2020, Nigeria imported just under 1 million metric tons of Russian wheat. In the same year, Nigerian producers harvested about 55,000 metric tons of wheat from approximately 50,000 hectares of cropland, for an average yield of just about 1.1 tons of wheat per hectare. While it would be nearly impossible for Nigeria to raise its average wheat yields by enough to completely replace Russian wheat imports, simply matching Russian average yields of just under 3 tons per hectare could offset more than 10 percent of imported Russian wheat without expanding cropland. Although 10 percent might sound small, an additional one million tons of Nigerian-grown wheat would go far to reduce the cost of food in Nigeria, alleviate short-term food insecurity from food supply shocks, and generate much-needed revenue for agricultural communities. Fertilizer prices are high in Africa, burdening farmers who already struggle to pay for nutrient inputs. Increases in fertilizer production capacity in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Nigeria may relieve some of the stress of high import costs but small gains in the short term are not enough. Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, countries such as Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Mauritania purchased between 20 and 50 percent of their fertilizer from Russia. They must now compete with other nations to purchase agricultural nutrients in a diminished market with inflated prices. To address food insecurity while limiting cropland expansion, African governments must increase fertilizer production capacity and drive greater adoption of fertilizer by lowering costs for farmers. Using synthetic fertilizer has high returns The nineteenth century was marked by periodic soil fertility crises. Industrialization in Europe put greater pressure on rural farmlands to feed growing urban centers, while removing key nutrients—namely, human waste—from the landscape. Phosphate rocks, seabird guano, and other nutrient dense products were added to farmlands, but demand led to skyrocketing prices and intermittent food supply disruptions. Although never reaching a breaking point of complete loss of soil fertility, the cyclical fertility patterns worried agriculturalists, soil scientists, and social theorists. In some cases even, it drove nations to military conflict over the agricultural nutrient trade. It wasn’t until Fritz Haber demonstrated his novel process for synthesizing ammonia in 1909, and Carl Bosch industrialized that process a few years later, that things changed. In 1913, when the Haber-Bosch process was first implemented at an industrial scale, the world population was around 1.8 billion. Today, the world population is just over 8 billion. Few technological innovations have had as significant a contribution to feeding a growing population than the Haber-Bosch process, which increased the use of synthetic fertilizer across the world. In fact, without synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, we would not be able to feed over 8 billion people. As of 2015, around 3 billion people around the world are sustained by food that is produced with synthetic fertilizer. Synthetic fertilizer, combined with other technologies and policies, has had major returns on agricultural productivity. In 1913, the average yield for an acre of corn grown in the United States was 22.7 bushels. Just 50 years later, the average acre planted with corn in the United States produced about 67.9 bushels of corn, a more-than three-fold increase. In 2013, American corn yields were on average 158.1 bushels per acre, just under 7 times as much corn per acre as a century earlier. Despite the clear benefits of synthetic fertilizers, their adoption has been geographically uneven. Richer farmers in Europe and North America could afford to adopt synthetic fertilizer relatively quickly following the industrialization of the Haber-Bosch process, but smallholder farmers throughout the world have historically been constrained by their lack of capital to purchase and use these inputs. Today, the use of synthetic fertilizer remains unevenly distributed. Outside of Egypt, African countries are among the lowest users of synthetic fertilizer in the world. The United States, for example, used an average of about 129 kg of fertilizer per hectare of cropland in 2018, Brazil used over 300 kg, China used just under 400, and Ukraine used about 65. By comparison, Zambia used 52 kg of fertilizer per hectare of cropland, while Malawi used 36, Ghana about 30, and Nigeria just under 20. Multiple African countries—Angola, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Niger, to name a few—used less than 10. Uneven use of synthetic fertilizer is one of the key factors that drives differences in agricultural productivity. Crop and livestock yield in countries that utilize energy-intensive agricultural inputs are significantly higher than in countries that use fewer of these inputs. The yield gap between rich countries and poor countries reinforces country-level inequality, exacerbates food insecurity, and increases import dependence. Average corn yields in Ghana, Malawi, Nigeria, and Zambia between 2016 and 2020 are all less than half of Brazil’s national yield averages over the same period, and around a fifth of yields in the United States. While soybean yields are closer to even—soybeans and other legumes are less reliant on added nitrogen due to the crop’s capacity to fix nitrogen from the atmosphere—even Africa’s most productive soybean producer, Ghana, has yields at about half that of Brazil and the United States. Efforts to increase the use of fertilizer have paid off but a lack of funds has made it difficult for governments to subsidize fertilizer for a sustained period of time. Malawi, for example, subsidized fertilizer purchases for their agricultural producers for almost a half-decade between 2005 and 2009. Yield responses were positive; one study found that farmers that received ISP vouchers increased their maize yields by about 42 percent on average. This program cost the Malawi agricultural ministry about $74 million over four years, equivalent to about 70 percent of the ministry budget and 16 percent of the total government budget. The Nigerian government also subsidized the cost of fertilizer from 2001 to 2014, seeing overall increases in fertilizer usage and an uptick in overall yields. Although Nigeria employed far lower subsidization rates than Malawi—subsidies peaked from 2012 to 2014 at 50 percent of market price—one study found that yields increased by 38 percent between 2010 and 2013 alone. As in the case of Malawi, Nigeria’s subsidies represented a substantial portion of the governments’ overall spending on agriculture. In 2008, Nigeria spent 24.1 percent of its agricultural budget on fertilizer subsidies, in 2009 that number declined to 16 percent, only to rebound to 26 percent in 2010. Similar programs in Zambia, Ghana, and Tanzania increased crop yields but were limited in total outreach. Zambian farmers who took advantage of fertilizer subsidies saw an 18 percent increase in yields by 2013. A decade-long effort to provide subsidized fertilizer in Ghana, according to one study, saw cereal yields increase by 24.5 percent. In Tanzania, the reported results were far more significant, with farmers who received vouchers increasing their yields by as much as 103 percent in areas with high rainfall, and by 89.5 percent in areas with less rainfall. Use of fertilizer has a positive correlation with yields, but it isn’t the only thing that matters. Real productivity gains associated with fertilizer are also dependent on other technological and practical improvements. For example, to improve productivity, better irrigation systems are also necessary. Currently, about 95 percent of African agriculture is rain0fed, rather than irrigated. While some crops, including cereals like corn and wheat, are less water-intensive and do not require irrigation in rainier regions, many vegetables, fruits, nuts, and other high-value crops, need irrigation to maximize yields. Mechanization also plays an important role in increasing productivity. While tractors and other mechanized equipment are ubiquitous in rich countries, African farmers continue to rely on manual and animal labor. From 2010 to 2012, only 4 percent of Nigerian farm households utilized tractors during the rainy seasons. From 1992 to 2012, the percentage of Kenyan farmers who used tractors declined from 5 percent to 2 percent, while use of animals, like oxen, increased from 17 percent to 32 percent. While animal labor can be productivity enhancing, especially on small farms, oxen are no match for tractors. Synthetic fertilizer results in greenhouse gas emissions but has climate and land use benefits, too Synthetic fertilizer is responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, local pollution, and more. Its production emits CO2 from the burning of natural gas or other fossil fuels for energy. Its application—or rather, over-application—produces nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas about 300 times as potent as carbon dioxide. Excessive use of fertilizer—synthetic or not—results in runoff from agricultural fields into waterways, driving the growth of algal blooms. These turn waterways hypoxic, producing dead zones where fish, plants, and other water-based species cannot survive. Opponents of synthetic fertilizer would call its use “extractive.” For example, organic and regenerative proponents like the Rodale Institute in the United States, the Soil Association in the United Kingdom, and others, argue that the use of synthetic fertilizer and other chemicals in agriculture threaten long-term soil fertility and put agricultural production out of harmony with nature. Although there are real problems with synthetic fertilizers, the alternatives—organic fertilizers like manure or other animal-based products—do not mitigate problems with run-off and greenhouse gas emissions, or change the fact that agriculture disrupts “natural” landscapes. To make matters worse, these alternatives do not increase productivity in agriculture. In places where fertilizer use remains low, increased use will likely result in short-term ecological issues and higher greenhouse gas emissions. This is especially true where farm plots remain small, and farm capitalization is low. In China, for example, competing policies to keep farm sizes small while increasing fertilizer use and thus productivity have led to chronic over-application due to the difficulty of knowledge transfer to small farms, and the inability of smaller operations to afford improved technologies that allow for less wasteful fertilizer practices. China’s intention behind keeping farm sizes small was to protect struggling rural communities, but this approach limits the capacity for technological adoption and environmentally sustainable productivity growth by restricting capital accumulation. Problems of overuse and resulting local ecological harm can be fixed. In the long term, synthetic fertilizers are critical to achieving high productivity, low food prices, and lower levels of hunger. Governments will need to be conscientious of how increased productivity can lead to farm consolidation and reduced employment and may need to foster rural-urban migration. Despite tradeoffs, the benefits of synthetic fertilizer with respect to agricultural productivity and increased food security are too important to ignore. In places where agricultural yields remain low, increased fertilizer usage can be a climate and land-use win in the long-term. Low yielding agriculture requires more land to produce food than higher-productivity agriculture. Recent analysis from NASA found that the rate of agricultural land expansion in Africa has accelerated over the past few years, as growing populations require more food, and foreign investors target African countries as potential sites of export-oriented agricultural production. Cropland expansion is the primary cause of deforestation and habitat loss. Accordingly, it is a major threat to biodiversity. Cropland expansion also threatens to release the carbon stored in natural ecosystems into the atmosphere. For example, a 2018 study estimated that by 2050, cropland expansion could be responsible for up to 11.48 gigatons of carbon storage lost due to expanding agricultural production. Attempts to replace portions of food imports with domestic African production at current levels of yield could result in drastic increases in the use of land for agriculture. For example, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which relies on Russia for just under 60 percent of its total wheat supply, wheat is grown on approximately 8000 hectares. To replace the 200,000 tons of Russian wheat imported in 2020, the DRC would need to dedicate approximately 175,000 more hectares of cropland to wheat production—an over 20-fold increase in land used for wheat production. While cropland expansion is not necessarily a bad thing for African agriculture—after all, hunger and food insecurity are the top concern for many governments—increased agricultural productivity can provide both food security and environmental protection, despite the tradeoff of more runoff. To maximize the climate benefits from fertilizer use, producers will need the proper data and information to make targeted use of fertilizer inputs. Use of technological innovations—both information technologies that can provide clear and usable data, and mechanical tools that make that data actionable—can both reduce the total amount of fertilizer needed to maximize yields and protect the local environment from nutrient pollution. Yet even in high-income countries, adoption of these technologies has been slow. Long-term cost-saving from reduced fertilizer use can offset the costs of adoption of precision agricultural equipment and techniques, but the economic realities of production often make these capital investments difficult to justify. In less developed economies, where farmers face greater risks and have less access to capital—either from government assistance programs or private financing—precision agriculture is not a short-term solution. In the mean-time, use of fertilizer —even inefficient use—will be necessary to reduce cropland expansion, limit GHG emissions, and improve access to abundant food. How to lower the cost of fertilizer Agricultural inputs are expensive. This is true everywhere, but especially true in Africa, where transportation costs—both overseas shipping and rail and trucking costs on the continent—drive up fertilizer prices. Farmers in Uganda, for example, pay about twice the price per bag of fertilizer than farmers in the United States while earning less than 5 percent of U.S. incomes. Within nations and regions, fertilizer price variations depend on distance traveled. Proximity to ports and fertilizer production drastically lowers prices compared to land-locked and rural regions. The high cost of fertilizer, relative to available capital means that fertilizer purchases come with higher risks. Farmers in Africa own smaller plots of land and have less capital available to adopt new practices and inputs. Especially when farmers lack experience and tools necessary to use fertilizer most efficiently, utilizing a large portion of operating expenses for the possibility of uncertain yield improvement seems unappealing. Local production of fertilizer will help. In Nigeria, the Dangote Group opened the world’s second-largest fertilizer production facility in early 2022. Similarly, the OCP Group, a Moroccan-state run firm, plans to construct several fertilizer production facilities in Africa. First on their list is an Ethiopian facility slated to open in 2023. Increasing production capacity in Africa will be crucial to reducing prices and making fertilizer available to more African farmers. But a gradual increase in production capacity may not reduce prices enough. If demand for inputs continues to increase, production capacity will need to increase exponentially to maintain low prices. There are many things governments can do to improve access to fertilizers, including maintaining a healthy macroeconomic environment and improving small farmers’ access to credit and providing carefully targeted subsidies. But the most important intervention might be to lower the cost of transportation of fertilizer from factory or port to the farm. Several studies point to the importance of supply corridors, including better functioning ports of entry and more transportation options to lower costs and improve access for farmers. As one report says, “the last mile of a fertilizer’s journey to the grower is often the most expensive and often the biggest barrier to its use.” The International Fund for Agricultural Development points out that transporting fertilizer from an African seaport to a farm 100 km inland can cost more than transporting the fertilizer from North America to Africa. A World Bank report says that reducing transport costs is likely to increase the profitability of fertilizer in Nigeria more than the provision of subsidies. Any efforts to increase production will need to be matched by a trade and transportation system capable of delivering fertilizer at a reasonable cost to farmers. Increasing agricultural productivity in Africa and other parts of the world is central to meeting the rising demand for food. In Africa, raising productivity will require much greater use of synthetic fertilizer. While critiques of fertilizer usage are common amongst Western environmentalists, many national governments and international organizations have embraced the need for more and better agricultural inputs in Sub-Saharan Africa. Innovations to increase the returns to the use of fertilizer while also reducing harmful side effects will be critical to meeting the demand for food. Increasing the productivity of agriculture and making investments in the greening of fertilizer should be the focus of rich countries as well as development banks and other organizations that play a role in alleviating food insecurity and hunger in Africa.

As of 2015, around 3 billion people around the world are sustained by food that is produced with synthetic fertilizer.

Synthetic fertilizer, combined with other technologies and policies, has had major returns on agricultural productivity. In 1913, the average yield for an acre of corn grown in the United States was 22.7 bushels.

Just 50 years later, the average acre planted with corn in the United States produced about 67.9 bushels of corn, a more-than three-fold increase. In 2013, American corn yields were on average 158.1 bushels per acre, just under 7 times as much corn per acre as a century earlier.

Despite the clear benefits of synthetic fertilizers, their adoption has been geographically uneven. Richer farmers in Europe and North America could afford to adopt synthetic fertilizer relatively quickly following the industrialization of the Haber-Bosch process, but smallholder farmers throughout the world have historically been constrained by their lack of capital to purchase and use these inputs.

Today, the use of synthetic fertilizer remains unevenly distributed. Outside of Egypt, African countries are among the lowest users of synthetic fertilizer in the world. The United States, for example, used an average of about 129 kg of fertilizer per hectare of cropland in 2018, Brazil used over 300 kg, China used just under 400, and Ukraine used about 65.

By comparison, Zambia used 52 kg of fertilizer per hectare of cropland, while Malawi used 36, Ghana about 30, and Nigeria just under 20. Multiple African countries—Angola, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Niger, to name a few—used less than 10.

If you were to listen to some Western commentators on agriculture, you would think that the worst thing that farmers could do is increase their use of fertilizer. Synthetic fertilizer, after all, is a fossil fuel product. Nutrient run-off is a grave threat to fisheries, waterways, and more. Above all, commentators emphasize, synthetic fertilizers put agriculture out of harmony with the “natural” soils that have long nourished the families of subsistence farmers and smallholders who sell their cereals and produce in urban and suburban markets. But synthetic fertilizer has significant upsides, too. Despite short-term ecological challenges, and dependence on fossil fuels for its production, the benefits of increased synthetic fertilizer use—higher farm yields, reduced dependency on imports, improved food security, and lowered pressure on forested and other wild landscapes—outweigh the costs. Synthetic fertilizer also has counterintuitive climate and land use benefits. Africa’s agricultural yields lag the rest of the world, leaving it dependent on costly imports. Between 2016 and 2018, as much as 85 percent of Africa’s food was imported. Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, about a third of Africa’s wheat came from either Russia or Ukraine. Some countries, like Congo and Tanzania, relied on Ukraine and Russia for more than 70 percent of their wheat supply. Higher price levels after the invasion have meant that consumers and governments are paying significantly more for food. High food prices are an enormous burden for individuals, families, and communities who already experience high levels of poverty and food insecurity. Nigeria’s inflation rate so far in 2022 is at 20.8 percent, Ethiopia’s is 30.2 percent, and Sudan’s sits at a whopping 148.8 percent. A recent United Nations World Food Program report highlighted 19 “hunger hotspots” in 2022, of which 16 were in Africa. Topping this dismal list was the Democratic Republic of Congo, which has seen a 25 percent increase in its food insecure population (bringing the total to almost 26 million people). Ethiopia and Nigeria follow, with around 20 million food insecure people each. In the 16 “hunger hotspots” alone—not even considering food insecure populations elsewhere in Africa—about 114 million people face shortages, high prices, and hunger. There are more people in Africa facing food insecurity than the entire population of Russia. In 2020, Nigeria imported just under 1 million metric tons of Russian wheat. In the same year, Nigerian producers harvested about 55,000 metric tons of wheat from approximately 50,000 hectares of cropland, for an average yield of just about 1.1 tons of wheat per hectare. While it would be nearly impossible for Nigeria to raise its average wheat yields by enough to completely replace Russian wheat imports, simply matching Russian average yields of just under 3 tons per hectare could offset more than 10 percent of imported Russian wheat without expanding cropland. Although 10 percent might sound small, an additional one million tons of Nigerian-grown wheat would go far to reduce the cost of food in Nigeria, alleviate short-term food insecurity from food supply shocks, and generate much-needed revenue for agricultural communities. Fertilizer prices are high in Africa, burdening farmers who already struggle to pay for nutrient inputs. Increases in fertilizer production capacity in Ethiopia, Ghana, and Nigeria may relieve some of the stress of high import costs but small gains in the short term are not enough. Prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, countries such as Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Mauritania purchased between 20 and 50 percent of their fertilizer from Russia. They must now compete with other nations to purchase agricultural nutrients in a diminished market with inflated prices. To address food insecurity while limiting cropland expansion, African governments must increase fertilizer production capacity and drive greater adoption of fertilizer by lowering costs for farmers. Using synthetic fertilizer has high returns The nineteenth century was marked by periodic soil fertility crises. Industrialization in Europe put greater pressure on rural farmlands to feed growing urban centers, while removing key nutrients—namely, human waste—from the landscape. Phosphate rocks, seabird guano, and other nutrient dense products were added to farmlands, but demand led to skyrocketing prices and intermittent food supply disruptions. Although never reaching a breaking point of complete loss of soil fertility, the cyclical fertility patterns worried agriculturalists, soil scientists, and social theorists. In some cases even, it drove nations to military conflict over the agricultural nutrient trade. It wasn’t until Fritz Haber demonstrated his novel process for synthesizing ammonia in 1909, and Carl Bosch industrialized that process a few years later, that things changed. In 1913, when the Haber-Bosch process was first implemented at an industrial scale, the world population was around 1.8 billion. Today, the world population is just over 8 billion. Few technological innovations have had as significant a contribution to feeding a growing population than the Haber-Bosch process, which increased the use of synthetic fertilizer across the world. In fact, without synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, we would not be able to feed over 8 billion people. As of 2015, around 3 billion people around the world are sustained by food that is produced with synthetic fertilizer. Synthetic fertilizer, combined with other technologies and policies, has had major returns on agricultural productivity. In 1913, the average yield for an acre of corn grown in the United States was 22.7 bushels. Just 50 years later, the average acre planted with corn in the United States produced about 67.9 bushels of corn, a more-than three-fold increase. In 2013, American corn yields were on average 158.1 bushels per acre, just under 7 times as much corn per acre as a century earlier. Despite the clear benefits of synthetic fertilizers, their adoption has been geographically uneven. Richer farmers in Europe and North America could afford to adopt synthetic fertilizer relatively quickly following the industrialization of the Haber-Bosch process, but smallholder farmers throughout the world have historically been constrained by their lack of capital to purchase and use these inputs. Today, the use of synthetic fertilizer remains unevenly distributed. Outside of Egypt, African countries are among the lowest users of synthetic fertilizer in the world. The United States, for example, used an average of about 129 kg of fertilizer per hectare of cropland in 2018, Brazil used over 300 kg, China used just under 400, and Ukraine used about 65. By comparison, Zambia used 52 kg of fertilizer per hectare of cropland, while Malawi used 36, Ghana about 30, and Nigeria just under 20. Multiple African countries—Angola, Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Niger, to name a few—used less than 10. Uneven use of synthetic fertilizer is one of the key factors that drives differences in agricultural productivity. Crop and livestock yield in countries that utilize energy-intensive agricultural inputs are significantly higher than in countries that use fewer of these inputs. The yield gap between rich countries and poor countries reinforces country-level inequality, exacerbates food insecurity, and increases import dependence. Average corn yields in Ghana, Malawi, Nigeria, and Zambia between 2016 and 2020 are all less than half of Brazil’s national yield averages over the same period, and around a fifth of yields in the United States. While soybean yields are closer to even—soybeans and other legumes are less reliant on added nitrogen due to the crop’s capacity to fix nitrogen from the atmosphere—even Africa’s most productive soybean producer, Ghana, has yields at about half that of Brazil and the United States. Efforts to increase the use of fertilizer have paid off but a lack of funds has made it difficult for governments to subsidize fertilizer for a sustained period of time. Malawi, for example, subsidized fertilizer purchases for their agricultural producers for almost a half-decade between 2005 and 2009. Yield responses were positive; one study found that farmers that received ISP vouchers increased their maize yields by about 42 percent on average. This program cost the Malawi agricultural ministry about $74 million over four years, equivalent to about 70 percent of the ministry budget and 16 percent of the total government budget. The Nigerian government also subsidized the cost of fertilizer from 2001 to 2014, seeing overall increases in fertilizer usage and an uptick in overall yields. Although Nigeria employed far lower subsidization rates than Malawi—subsidies peaked from 2012 to 2014 at 50 percent of market price—one study found that yields increased by 38 percent between 2010 and 2013 alone. As in the case of Malawi, Nigeria’s subsidies represented a substantial portion of the governments’ overall spending on agriculture. In 2008, Nigeria spent 24.1 percent of its agricultural budget on fertilizer subsidies, in 2009 that number declined to 16 percent, only to rebound to 26 percent in 2010. Similar programs in Zambia, Ghana, and Tanzania increased crop yields but were limited in total outreach. Zambian farmers who took advantage of fertilizer subsidies saw an 18 percent increase in yields by 2013. A decade-long effort to provide subsidized fertilizer in Ghana, according to one study, saw cereal yields increase by 24.5 percent. In Tanzania, the reported results were far more significant, with farmers who received vouchers increasing their yields by as much as 103 percent in areas with high rainfall, and by 89.5 percent in areas with less rainfall. Use of fertilizer has a positive correlation with yields, but it isn’t the only thing that matters. Real productivity gains associated with fertilizer are also dependent on other technological and practical improvements. For example, to improve productivity, better irrigation systems are also necessary. Currently, about 95 percent of African agriculture is rain0fed, rather than irrigated. While some crops, including cereals like corn and wheat, are less water-intensive and do not require irrigation in rainier regions, many vegetables, fruits, nuts, and other high-value crops, need irrigation to maximize yields. Mechanization also plays an important role in increasing productivity. While tractors and other mechanized equipment are ubiquitous in rich countries, African farmers continue to rely on manual and animal labor. From 2010 to 2012, only 4 percent of Nigerian farm households utilized tractors during the rainy seasons. From 1992 to 2012, the percentage of Kenyan farmers who used tractors declined from 5 percent to 2 percent, while use of animals, like oxen, increased from 17 percent to 32 percent. While animal labor can be productivity enhancing, especially on small farms, oxen are no match for tractors. Synthetic fertilizer results in greenhouse gas emissions but has climate and land use benefits, too Synthetic fertilizer is responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, local pollution, and more. Its production emits CO2 from the burning of natural gas or other fossil fuels for energy. Its application—or rather, over-application—produces nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas about 300 times as potent as carbon dioxide. Excessive use of fertilizer—synthetic or not—results in runoff from agricultural fields into waterways, driving the growth of algal blooms. These turn waterways hypoxic, producing dead zones where fish, plants, and other water-based species cannot survive. Opponents of synthetic fertilizer would call its use “extractive.” For example, organic and regenerative proponents like the Rodale Institute in the United States, the Soil Association in the United Kingdom, and others, argue that the use of synthetic fertilizer and other chemicals in agriculture threaten long-term soil fertility and put agricultural production out of harmony with nature. Although there are real problems with synthetic fertilizers, the alternatives—organic fertilizers like manure or other animal-based products—do not mitigate problems with run-off and greenhouse gas emissions, or change the fact that agriculture disrupts “natural” landscapes. To make matters worse, these alternatives do not increase productivity in agriculture. In places where fertilizer use remains low, increased use will likely result in short-term ecological issues and higher greenhouse gas emissions. This is especially true where farm plots remain small, and farm capitalization is low. In China, for example, competing policies to keep farm sizes small while increasing fertilizer use and thus productivity have led to chronic over-application due to the difficulty of knowledge transfer to small farms, and the inability of smaller operations to afford improved technologies that allow for less wasteful fertilizer practices. China’s intention behind keeping farm sizes small was to protect struggling rural communities, but this approach limits the capacity for technological adoption and environmentally sustainable productivity growth by restricting capital accumulation. Problems of overuse and resulting local ecological harm can be fixed. In the long term, synthetic fertilizers are critical to achieving high productivity, low food prices, and lower levels of hunger. Governments will need to be conscientious of how increased productivity can lead to farm consolidation and reduced employment and may need to foster rural-urban migration. Despite tradeoffs, the benefits of synthetic fertilizer with respect to agricultural productivity and increased food security are too important to ignore. In places where agricultural yields remain low, increased fertilizer usage can be a climate and land-use win in the long-term. Low yielding agriculture requires more land to produce food than higher-productivity agriculture. Recent analysis from NASA found that the rate of agricultural land expansion in Africa has accelerated over the past few years, as growing populations require more food, and foreign investors target African countries as potential sites of export-oriented agricultural production. Cropland expansion is the primary cause of deforestation and habitat loss. Accordingly, it is a major threat to biodiversity. Cropland expansion also threatens to release the carbon stored in natural ecosystems into the atmosphere. For example, a 2018 study estimated that by 2050, cropland expansion could be responsible for up to 11.48 gigatons of carbon storage lost due to expanding agricultural production. Attempts to replace portions of food imports with domestic African production at current levels of yield could result in drastic increases in the use of land for agriculture. For example, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which relies on Russia for just under 60 percent of its total wheat supply, wheat is grown on approximately 8000 hectares. To replace the 200,000 tons of Russian wheat imported in 2020, the DRC would need to dedicate approximately 175,000 more hectares of cropland to wheat production—an over 20-fold increase in land used for wheat production. While cropland expansion is not necessarily a bad thing for African agriculture—after all, hunger and food insecurity are the top concern for many governments—increased agricultural productivity can provide both food security and environmental protection, despite the tradeoff of more runoff. To maximize the climate benefits from fertilizer use, producers will need the proper data and information to make targeted use of fertilizer inputs. Use of technological innovations—both information technologies that can provide clear and usable data, and mechanical tools that make that data actionable—can both reduce the total amount of fertilizer needed to maximize yields and protect the local environment from nutrient pollution. Yet even in high-income countries, adoption of these technologies has been slow. Long-term cost-saving from reduced fertilizer use can offset the costs of adoption of precision agricultural equipment and techniques, but the economic realities of production often make these capital investments difficult to justify. In less developed economies, where farmers face greater risks and have less access to capital—either from government assistance programs or private financing—precision agriculture is not a short-term solution. In the mean-time, use of fertilizer —even inefficient use—will be necessary to reduce cropland expansion, limit GHG emissions, and improve access to abundant food. How to lower the cost of fertilizer Agricultural inputs are expensive. This is true everywhere, but especially true in Africa, where transportation costs—both overseas shipping and rail and trucking costs on the continent—drive up fertilizer prices. Farmers in Uganda, for example, pay about twice the price per bag of fertilizer than farmers in the United States while earning less than 5 percent of U.S. incomes. Within nations and regions, fertilizer price variations depend on distance traveled. Proximity to ports and fertilizer production drastically lowers prices compared to land-locked and rural regions. The high cost of fertilizer, relative to available capital means that fertilizer purchases come with higher risks. Farmers in Africa own smaller plots of land and have less capital available to adopt new practices and inputs. Especially when farmers lack experience and tools necessary to use fertilizer most efficiently, utilizing a large portion of operating expenses for the possibility of uncertain yield improvement seems unappealing. Local production of fertilizer will help. In Nigeria, the Dangote Group opened the world’s second-largest fertilizer production facility in early 2022. Similarly, the OCP Group, a Moroccan-state run firm, plans to construct several fertilizer production facilities in Africa. First on their list is an Ethiopian facility slated to open in 2023. Increasing production capacity in Africa will be crucial to reducing prices and making fertilizer available to more African farmers. But a gradual increase in production capacity may not reduce prices enough. If demand for inputs continues to increase, production capacity will need to increase exponentially to maintain low prices. There are many things governments can do to improve access to fertilizers, including maintaining a healthy macroeconomic environment and improving small farmers’ access to credit and providing carefully targeted subsidies. But the most important intervention might be to lower the cost of transportation of fertilizer from factory or port to the farm. Several studies point to the importance of supply corridors, including better functioning ports of entry and more transportation options to lower costs and improve access for farmers. As one report says, “the last mile of a fertilizer’s journey to the grower is often the most expensive and often the biggest barrier to its use.” The International Fund for Agricultural Development points out that transporting fertilizer from an African seaport to a farm 100 km inland can cost more than transporting the fertilizer from North America to Africa. A World Bank report says that reducing transport costs is likely to increase the profitability of fertilizer in Nigeria more than the provision of subsidies. Any efforts to increase production will need to be matched by a trade and transportation system capable of delivering fertilizer at a reasonable cost to farmers. Increasing agricultural productivity in Africa and other parts of the world is central to meeting the rising demand for food. In Africa, raising productivity will require much greater use of synthetic fertilizer. While critiques of fertilizer usage are common amongst Western environmentalists, many national governments and international organizations have embraced the need for more and better agricultural inputs in Sub-Saharan Africa. Innovations to increase the returns to the use of fertilizer while also reducing harmful side effects will be critical to meeting the demand for food. Increasing the productivity of agriculture and making investments in the greening of fertilizer should be the focus of rich countries as well as development banks and other organizations that play a role in alleviating food insecurity and hunger in Africa.Uneven use of synthetic fertilizer is one of the key factors that drives differences in agricultural productivity. Crop and livestock yield in countries that utilize energy-intensive agricultural inputs are significantly higher than in countries that use fewer of these inputs. The yield gap between rich countries and poor countries reinforces country-level inequality, exacerbates food insecurity, and increases import dependence.

Average corn yields in Ghana, Malawi, Nigeria, and Zambia between 2016 and 2020 are all less than half of Brazil’s national yield averages over the same period, and around a fifth of yields in the United States. While soybean yields are closer to even—soybeans and other legumes are less reliant on added nitrogen due to the crop’s capacity to fix nitrogen from the atmosphere—even Africa’s most productive soybean producer, Ghana, has yields at about half that of Brazil and the United States.

Efforts to increase the use of fertilizer have paid off but a lack of funds has made it difficult for governments to subsidize fertilizer for a sustained period of time. Malawi, for example, subsidized fertilizer purchases for their agricultural producers for almost a half-decade between 2005 and 2009.

Yield responses were positive; one study found that farmers that received ISP vouchers increased their maize yields by about 42 percent on average. This program cost the Malawi agricultural ministry about $74 million over four years, equivalent to about 70 percent of the ministry budget and 16 percent of the total government budget.

The Nigerian government also subsidized the cost of fertilizer from 2001 to 2014, seeing overall increases in fertilizer usage and an uptick in overall yields. Although Nigeria employed far lower subsidization rates than Malawi—subsidies peaked from 2012 to 2014 at 50 percent of market price—one study found that yields increased by 38 percent between 2010 and 2013 alone. As in the case of Malawi, Nigeria’s subsidies represented a substantial portion of the governments’ overall spending on agriculture. In 2008, Nigeria spent 24.1 percent of its agricultural budget on fertilizer subsidies, in 2009 that number declined to 16 percent, only to rebound to 26 percent in 2010.

Similar programs in Zambia, Ghana, and Tanzania increased crop yields but were limited in total outreach. Zambian farmers who took advantage of fertilizer subsidies saw an 18 percent increase in yields by 2013.

A decade-long effort to provide subsidized fertilizer in Ghana, according to one study, saw cereal yields increase by 24.5 percent. In Tanzania, the reported results were far more significant, with farmers who received vouchers increasing their yields by as much as 103 percent in areas with high rainfall, and by 89.5 percent in areas with less rainfall.

Use of fertilizer has a positive correlation with yields, but it isn’t the only thing that matters. Real productivity gains associated with fertilizer are also dependent on other technological and practical improvements.

For example, to improve productivity, better irrigation systems are also necessary. Currently, about 95 percent of African agriculture is rain0fed, rather than irrigated. While some crops, including cereals like corn and wheat, are less water-intensive and do not require irrigation in rainier regions, many vegetables, fruits, nuts, and other high-value crops, need irrigation to maximize yields.

Mechanization also plays an important role in increasing productivity. While tractors and other mechanized equipment are ubiquitous in rich countries, African farmers continue to rely on manual and animal labor. From 2010 to 2012, only 4 percent of Nigerian farm households utilized tractors during the rainy seasons.

From 1992 to 2012, the percentage of Kenyan farmers who used tractors declined from 5 percent to 2 percent, while use of animals, like oxen, increased from 17 percent to 32 percent. While animal labor can be productivity enhancing, especially on small farms, oxen are no match for tractors.

Synthetic fertilizer results in greenhouse gas emissions but has climate and land use benefits, too

Synthetic fertilizer is responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, local pollution, and more. Its production emits CO2 from the burning of natural gas or other fossil fuels for energy. Its application—or rather, over-application—produces nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas about 300 times as potent as carbon dioxide.

Excessive use of fertilizer—synthetic or not—results in runoff from agricultural fields into waterways, driving the growth of algal blooms. These turn waterways hypoxic, producing dead zones where fish, plants, and other water-based species cannot survive.

Opponents of synthetic fertilizer would call its use “extractive.” For example, organic and regenerative proponents like the Rodale Institute in the United States, the Soil Association in the United Kingdom, and others, argue that the use of synthetic fertilizer and other chemicals in agriculture threaten long-term soil fertility and put agricultural production out of harmony with nature.

Although there are real problems with synthetic fertilizers, the alternatives—organic fertilizers like manure or other animal-based products—do not mitigate problems with run-off and greenhouse gas emissions, or change the fact that agriculture disrupts “natural” landscapes. To make matters worse, these alternatives do not increase productivity in agriculture.

In places where fertilizer use remains low, increased use will likely result in short-term ecological issues and higher greenhouse gas emissions. This is especially true where farm plots remain small, and farm capitalization is low.

In China, for example, competing policies to keep farm sizes small while increasing fertilizer use and thus productivity have led to chronic over-application due to the difficulty of knowledge transfer to small farms, and the inability of smaller operations to afford improved technologies that allow for less wasteful fertilizer practices. China’s intention behind keeping farm sizes small was to protect struggling rural communities, but this approach limits the capacity for technological adoption and environmentally sustainable productivity growth by restricting capital accumulation.

Problems of overuse and resulting local ecological harm can be fixed. In the long term, synthetic fertilizers are critical to achieving high productivity, low food prices, and lower levels of hunger. Governments will need to be conscientious of how increased productivity can lead to farm consolidation and reduced employment and may need to foster rural-urban migration. Despite tradeoffs, the benefits of synthetic fertilizer with respect to agricultural productivity and increased food security are too important to ignore.

In places where agricultural yields remain low, increased fertilizer usage can be a climate and land-use win in the long-term.

Low yielding agriculture requires more land to produce food than higher-productivity agriculture. Recent analysis from NASA found that the rate of agricultural land expansion in Africa has accelerated over the past few years, as growing populations require more food, and foreign investors target African countries as potential sites of export-oriented agricultural production. Cropland expansion is the primary cause of deforestation and habitat loss. Accordingly, it is a major threat to biodiversity.

Cropland expansion also threatens to release the carbon stored in natural ecosystems into the atmosphere. For example, a 2018 study estimated that by 2050, cropland expansion could be responsible for up to 11.48 gigatons of carbon storage lost due to expanding agricultural production.

Attempts to replace portions of food imports with domestic African production at current levels of yield could result in drastic increases in the use of land for agriculture. For example, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which relies on Russia for just under 60 percent of its total wheat supply, wheat is grown on approximately 8000 hectares. To replace the 200,000 tons of Russian wheat imported in 2020, the DRC would need to dedicate approximately 175,000 more hectares of cropland to wheat production—an over 20-fold increase in land used for wheat production.

While cropland expansion is not necessarily a bad thing for African agriculture—after all, hunger and food insecurity are the top concern for many governments—increased agricultural productivity can provide both food security and environmental protection, despite the tradeoff of more runoff.

To maximize the climate benefits from fertilizer use, producers will need the proper data and information to make targeted use of fertilizer inputs. Use of technological innovations—both information technologies that can provide clear and usable data, and mechanical tools that make that data actionable—can both reduce the total amount of fertilizer needed to maximize yields and protect the local environment from nutrient pollution.

Yet even in high-income countries, adoption of these technologies has been slow. Long-term cost-saving from reduced fertilizer use can offset the costs of adoption of precision agricultural equipment and techniques, but the economic realities of production often make these capital investments difficult to justify.

In less developed economies, where farmers face greater risks and have less access to capital—either from government assistance programs or private financing—precision agriculture is not a short-term solution. In the mean-time, use of fertilizer —even inefficient use—will be necessary to reduce cropland expansion, limit GHG emissions, and improve access to abundant food.

How to lower the cost of fertilizer

Agricultural inputs are expensive. This is true everywhere, but especially true in Africa, where transportation costs—both overseas shipping and rail and trucking costs on the continent—drive up fertilizer prices. Farmers in Uganda, for example, pay about twice the price per bag of fertilizer than farmers in the United States while earning less than 5 percent of U.S. incomes. Within nations and regions, fertilizer price variations depend on distance traveled. Proximity to ports and fertilizer production drastically lowers prices compared to land-locked and rural regions.

The high cost of fertilizer, relative to available capital means that fertilizer purchases come with higher risks. Farmers in Africa own smaller plots of land and have less capital available to adopt new practices and inputs. Especially when farmers lack experience and tools necessary to use fertilizer most efficiently, utilizing a large portion of operating expenses for the possibility of uncertain yield improvement seems unappealing.

Local production of fertilizer will help. In Nigeria, the Dangote Group opened the world’s second-largest fertilizer production facility in early 2022. Similarly, the OCP Group, a Moroccan-state run firm, plans to construct several fertilizer production facilities in Africa. First on their list is an Ethiopian facility slated to open in 2023. Increasing production capacity in Africa will be crucial to reducing prices and making fertilizer available to more African farmers.

But a gradual increase in production capacity may not reduce prices enough. If demand for inputs continues to increase, production capacity will need to increase exponentially to maintain low prices.

There are many things governments can do to improve access to fertilizers, including maintaining a healthy macroeconomic environment and improving small farmers’ access to credit and providing carefully targeted subsidies. But the most important intervention might be to lower the cost of transportation of fertilizer from factory or port to the farm. Several studies point to the importance of supply corridors, including better functioning ports of entry and more transportation options to lower costs and improve access for farmers.

As one report says, “the last mile of a fertilizer’s journey to the grower is often the most expensive and often the biggest barrier to its use.” The International Fund for Agricultural Development points out that transporting fertilizer from an African seaport to a farm 100 km inland can cost more than transporting the fertilizer from North America to Africa.

A World Bank report says that reducing transport costs is likely to increase the profitability of fertilizer in Nigeria more than the provision of subsidies. Any efforts to increase production will need to be matched by a trade and transportation system capable of delivering fertilizer at a reasonable cost to farmers.

Increasing agricultural productivity in Africa and other parts of the world is central to meeting the rising demand for food. In Africa, raising productivity will require much greater use of synthetic fertilizer. While critiques of fertilizer usage are common amongst Western environmentalists, many national governments and international organizations have embraced the need for more and better agricultural inputs in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Innovations to increase the returns to the use of fertilizer while also reducing harmful side effects will be critical to meeting the demand for food. Increasing the productivity of agriculture and making investments in the greening of fertilizer should be the focus of rich countries as well as development banks and other organizations that play a role in alleviating food insecurity and hunger in Africa.

About the Authors

Saloni is a Food and Agriculture Analyst at Breakthrough. She was a 2019 Breakthrough Generation Fellow.

Alex Smith is a Senior Food and Agriculture Analyst at Breakthrough.

Former African president regrets buying tractors for farmers

agrimachinery
-
0
Former African president regrets buying tractors for farmers

A former African head of state is regretting importing tractors and giving to farmers saying it was a wrong decision.

John Dramani Mahama former Ghanaian president says given the chance he would rather buy the tractors, give them to experts who would in turn provide tractor services to farmers.

This, he said will ensure that a person with the know how will maintain tractors for longetivity.

He said the tractors his government purchased for farmers broke down in a short period because they were not properly maintained.

“I realised that some of the things that we ourselves [did, we ]made mistakes with [them].

“We imported tractors and agricultural equipment, we gave them to farmers.”

“The farmer does not need the tractor, he does not need the agricultural equipment, he needs the services of a tractor.

“So somebody who knows how to maintain that tractor must have a service centre, where he provides the services to the farmer.”

“But we gave the tractors to the farmers, in a year or two the tractor had broken down because he [farmer] doesn’t know every six months you must change the engine oil, you must change the filters, you must grease the tractor, he [farmer] doesn’t know that.

“So we will approach it differently,” the former President said.

Also Read

Belarus To Ship Over 3,500 Tractors To Zimbabwe

New Features For Massey Ferguson’s New Generation Butterfly Mower

Belarus to ship over 3,500 tractors to Zimbabwe

agrimachinery
-
0
Belarus to ship over 3,500 tractors to Zimbabwe

Belarus’ Minsk Tractor Plant (MTZ trademark) and MTZ official dealer in Zimbabwe – AFTRADE DMCC company have signed a memorandum of strategic partnership to promote BELARUS machines on the Zimbabwean market, the MTZ press service told BelTA.

The document has been signed at the Belarus-Zimbabwe business forum in Harare, which is held ahead of the state visit of Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko to Zimbabwe.

“The Zimbabwean market openend for BELARUS machinery several years ago thanks to our reliable partner, AFTRADE DMCC. We are glad that today we are talking about strategic partnership that envisages work on a systematic perspective basis,” MTZ Director General Vitaly Vovk said.

According to the document, in 2023-2024 MTZ is set to supply 3,575 tractors to Zimbabwe. In the future, the batches and terms of delivery will be determined based on the results of negotiations with Zimbabwean agricultural enterprises.

In 2018-2022, MTZ delivered more than 1,800 vehicles to Zimbabwe. “We know that last year, for the first time in the past 50 years, the country fully provided itself with grain. It is gratifying that the country succeeded also thanks to BELARUS machinery,” Vitaly Vovk stressed.

In his words, there is a multi-purpose service center in Harare with branches in Mutare and Bulawayo, and also a warehouse for component parts to maintain the delivered machinery. MTZ together with its partner trains consumers to operate BELARUS tractors.

Minsk tractor plant is one of the largest manufacturers of agricultural machinery not only in the CIS countries, but also in the whole world. Customers are offered over 100 models of tractors in more than 200 assembly variants for all climatic and operational conditions.

New models have wide possibilities of aggregation with agricultural machinery of different manufacturers. MTW develops, manufactures and exports wheeled tractors and spare parts for them, arranges their production abroad under license, renders services in setting up and servicing of delivered machines, provides training in operation and maintenance of machinery produced.

Minsk Tractor Works (MTZ trademark) is one of the largest manufacturers of agricultural machines not only in the CIS states but the entire world. MTZ offers over 100 tractor models in more than 200 modifications for all climatic and operational conditions.

New models boast great capabilities with regard to the aggregation of agricultural machines of various manufacturers. MTZ designs, makes, and exports wheel tractors and spare parts, licenses their production abroad, organizes and offers aftersales service for sold vehicles, and offers personnel training with regard to operation and maintenance of the vehicles the company makes.

Source: Belta

New Features For Massey Ferguson’s New Generation Butterfly Mower

Solectrac electric tractors now available across US

 

New features for Massey Ferguson’s new generation butterfly mower

agrimachinery
-
0
New features for Massey Ferguson’s new generation butterfly mower

Massey Ferguson, a worldwide brand of AGCO (NYSE:AGCO), is delighted to announce it is strengthening its hay and forage harvesting range with a choice of conditioners for its new generation butterfly mowers, along with further features to boost productivity on its widest four-rotor rake.

“Since its launch, Massey Ferguson’s hay and forage equipment has been well received by owners and dealers, earning a good reputation for productivity and efficiency,” says Jérôme Aubrion, Director Marketing Massey Ferguson, Europe & Middle East.

“These latest developments are part of our strategy of constant improvement to ensure we continue to deliver our customers exactly the right machines with specification they require. Offering a choice of conditioners for the butterfly mowers enables users to improve forage quality using the system that is most appropriate for their crops and conditions.

“Upgrades to the new generation four rotor rakes increase durability as well improve operation, helping operators form the perfect swath for following machines,” he adds.

Conditioner choice for MF DM 8612 mowers

  • Latest MF DM 8612 TL butterfly mower now available with tine (KC) or roller (RC) conditioners
  • Heavy-duty drive to conditioner
  • DUO drive roller conditioner option
  •  Adjustable conditioning intensity
  • Well proven hydro-pneumatic suspension
  • Adjustable overlap increases accuracy
  • Folds vertically to within 4m for transport.


Tine or roller conditioners

Two new tine (KC) or roller (RC) conditioner options, available for the latest 8.6m wide, MF 8612 TL mower, increase the speed of wilting, which shortens the drying process and improves crop quality.

KC tine conditioner

Crop is conditioned using four rows of flexible tines, which are 5mm longer than previously and are secured against loss to protect following machinery. These lift and process the crop against an adjustable hood, which is now made from 4mm thick steel for increased durability. Four position settings allow users to set the appropriate conditioning intensity for the crop and conditions.
RC roller conditioner

Two, intermeshing rubber rollers compress the crop on the RC conditioner. The rollers’ special, spiral profiles provide intensive, yet gentle, crop conditioning and are ideally suited to working in legumes and other leafy crops.

Adjustable roller pressure enables operators to set the conditioning intensity. The upper roller can lift up, under pre-set spring pressure, to provide protection against foreign objects.

Strong, straightforward driveline

Drive for the conditioners is taken from the main gearbox or through the implement driveline, with shear bolt protection. The RC roller conditioner is also available with optional DUO Drive, which powers both the upper and lower rollers and is particularly suitable for working in heavy and damp crop conditions.

Renowned suspension system

Massey Ferguson’s latest generation butterfly mowers are equipped, as standard, with the latest generation TurboLift hydro-pneumatic damping system. This provides the mowers with a lateral swing angle of up to 19° downhill and 30° uphill, closely following contours to protect the sward, reduce contamination and improve forage quality.

Two-position width adjustment ensures MF DM TL mowers maintain a uniform cut when working in combination with 2.8m, 3.0m and 3.10m wide front mowers. This allows operators to adjust the width of the overlap between the front and rear mower, ensuring the whole width is cut – even when working around corners.

A new mechanism allows the mowers to fold to below 4m for transport and simplifies coupling up. It also improves stability in work and enables the machine to be safely stored vertically, without any extra stands.

This attachment system also delivers reliable mower protection with a straightforward, break-back system.

Four rotor rake developments

Massey Ferguson’s flagship MF RK 1404 TRC-PRO Gen2 four rake, capable of working at widths from 10.5m to 13.8m, benefits from a number of changes that increase productivity, durability and improve ease of use.

Fully ISOBUS compliant control is provided by proCONNECT, which provides convenient operation of all the main functions include a single lift for all rotors, work/swath width adjustment as well as setting the height of the individual rotors and headland lift. It is also possible to program all the control functions on the joystick and log the area and hours worked.

To further ease the operator’s workload myMemory, a comprehensive rake management system, automatically adjusts the machine to the previous settings, for fast and convenient set-up in the field.

New features for Massey Ferguson’s new generation butterfly mower and four rotor rake

Another useful feature, gapControl, monitors the rotors’ overlap and enables operators to make precise adjustments from the tractor seat. This boosts output by ensuring the rake always operates at its maximum effective working width.

A new smart design combines style with practicality, with durable plastic covers and sheets replacing metal guards. These resist corrosion and are also less susceptible to damage.

Elsewhere new sensors monitor the steering angle as well as the lifting axle and swath width. There’s also a new option of five LED lights to improve vision when working into the night.

A straightforward folding system, easily operated from the cab, automatically ensures the rotors lift or lower only when the axle is in the correct position. As well making it easier and more convenient when changing fields, the 4m transport height makes it safer to move on the road – and is within the maximum limit for certain market.

Also Read

Kubota Unveils LX20 Series Tractor

John Deere partners with Microsoft to bring new value to Dealers

 

 

John Deere Debuts New Planting Technology & Electric Excavator

agrimachinery
-
0
John Deere Debuts New Planting Technology & Electric Excavator

During John Deere’s CES 2023 keynote address, the company revealed two new technologies, ExactShot™ and an electric excavator, that will help Deere’s customers be more productive, profitable, and sustainable.

“Everything we do at John Deere is focused on real purpose and real impact,” said Jahmy Hindman, CTO at John Deere. “This means we’re developing technology that enables our customers to provide the food, fuel, fiber and infrastructure that our growing global population needs.”

ExactShot allows farmers to reduce the amount of starter fertilizer needed during planting by more than 60%. The technology uses sensors and robotics to place starter fertilizer precisely onto seeds as they are planted in the soil, rather than applying a continuous flow of fertilizer to the entire row of seeds.

The electric excavator, powered by a Kreisel battery, will provide construction workers and road builders with lower daily operating costs, reduced jobsite noise, enhanced machine reliability, and zero emissions, without sacrificing the power and performance they need in a machine.

ExactShot Details:
  • ExactShot will help farmers be economically and environmentally sustainable as they work tirelessly to grow the food, fuel and fiber that we all rely on. With the global population expected to grow from 8 billion to nearly 10 billion by 2050, farmers need to increase production by 60% to 70% on today’s arable land.
  • ExactShot uses a sensor to register when each individual seed is in the process of going into the soil. As this occurs, a robot will spray only the amount of fertilizer needed, about 0.2 ML, directly onto the seed at the exact moment as it goes into the ground.
  • Across the U.S. corn crop, ExactShot could save over 93 million gallons of starter fertilizer annually and prevent wasted fertilizer from encouraging weed growth or increasing the risk of running off the field into a waterway.
Electric Excavator Details:
  • Deere’s new electric excavator, powered by a Kreisel battery, will improve reliability, performance and safety in construction. Its use on construction sites will result in fewer moving parts, less noise pollution, and fewer emissions.
  • Deere acquired a majority stake in Kreisel Electric, which created state-of-the-art battery technology for a wide range of mobile and stationary applications. Kreisel’s patented immersion cooling architecture provides unsurpassed lifetime, enhanced safety, and improved performance for battery-powered equipment.
  • Kreisel’s charging technology results in faster and lower-cost connections to the electrical grid.

Also Read

Kubota Unveils LX20 Series Tractor

New Herbicide GUSS sprayer to be available at select John Deere dealer locations

Solectrac electric tractors now available across US

agrimachinery
-
0
Solectrac electric tractors now available across US

Ideanomics (NASDAQ: IDEX), a global company focused on accelerating the commercial adoption of electric vehicles (EV), is pleased to announce that its subsidiary Solectrac is continuing with the rapid expansion of its certified sales and dealer network.

For the first time, Solectrac climate-smart tractors are available in Hawaii, Maine, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia. The company also continues to strengthen its position in California with two added dealers. Customers can now find Solectrac tractors coast to coast across the U.S. at 38 locations.

“Our growth strategy is working. In just six months, we saw more Solectrac tractor sales than all of last year,” said Ideanomics Mobility President, Robin Mackie. “Of course, this is no surprise. Solectrac makes the best electric tractor – it’s powerful, quiet, and zero-emission. By expanding our dealer network, we are making it as easy as possible for customers to see, touch, test, and ultimately own one.”

The new dealer partners include Bacon Universal Co., Inc. (Hawaii), Bangor Tractor & Equipment (Maine), Beeler Tractor Co. (Calif.), Bill’s Tractor and Equipment, LTD. (Texas), Cox Tractor Co., Inc. (Tenn.), N&S Tractor (Calif.), O.P.E. of America, Inc. (N.C.), PowerPro Equipment (Pa.), and Tractor Pros (W.Va.). With the addition of these new dealers, Solectrac tractors are available at 16 dealers across 15 states. Enabled by its fast-growing dealer network, Solectrac has been able to sell every tractor that rolls off the assembly line.

To support its expanding number of dealers and growing customer base, Solectrac has developed a first-to-market, online total cost of ownership calculator called SolecSave. SolecSave provides customers with a clear picture of the total cost of owning an electric tractor vs. a combustion engine tractor and provides information on available incentives and grants to buy an electric tractor.

This tool is the latest example of how Ideanomics and its subsidiaries are providing customers with resources to navigate the complexity of fleet electrification, such as WareSmart for warehouse operators in Southern California.

Solectrac is developing several additional new tractor models with plans to introduce the first new model in 2023. The company recently moved into a new, larger facility, which will significantly enhance its manufacturing and assembly capacity once up and running including a well-stocked parts warehouse and service training center. Additionally, Solectrac established a partnership with Nolan Manufacturing to support its growing demand along the east coast.

Ideanomics is solving the complexity of fleet electrification by bringing together high-performance electric vehicles, charging infrastructure, and financing solutions under one roof. The company views Solectrac’s electric tractors as a flagship solution for the fast-growing, high-value off-road vehicle market.

Ideanomics is committed to supporting the growth of Solectrac, which includes exploring opportunities to incorporate technology from Energica, maker of the world’s best electric motorcycle, into the next generation of Solectrac tractors.

Also Read

Kubota Unveils LX20 Series Tractor

New Herbicide GUSS sprayer to be available at select John Deere dealer locations

Kubota unveils LX20 Series Tractor

agrimachinery
-
0
Kubota unveils LX20 Series Tractor

Kubota Tractor has announced the addition of its new LX20 Series of tractors, adding two new models – the LX3520 and LX4020 – as well as the expansion of its L02 Series, introducing the new L2502 and L4802 models to the company’s compact tractor line.

The new models were unveiled at the 2023 National Farm Machinery show in Louisville, Kentucky, and will be available nationwide at authorized Kubota dealers later this spring, the company reports.

“Kubota’s compact tractor line is built with outstanding quality, performance, comfort and durability in mind, and these latest model additions are no exception,” says Beau Woodbury, Kubota LX, L Series product manager.

“With each new release and update, the LX20 and L02 Series tractors continue to make incremental improvements, while maintaining their market position and outstanding user experience. Their versatility makes them invaluable property maintenance tools for easy material handling and transport, due to implements that can be added.”

Designed with both residential and commercial operators in mind, the Kubota LX20 Series tractors add 35- and 40-HP configurations – which allows for greater variety of performance-matched implements – and boast an array of operator-centric features, from an updated cabin area to new grips and easier-to-maneuver controls.

Both LX20s feature a redesigned transmission aimed at significantly reducing HST noise for the operator, while an auto throttle helps the tractor to drive with ease. The LX20 Series also features a wider front axle as well as a performance matched front loader designed to further improve ease of operation and maneuverability.

In addition, a dual engine memory switch allows the operator to preset their preferred RPMS and have the engine match that speed. New mower decks are available for both LX20 models, with integrated wash port attachments to make cleaning under the deck easier.

Two new models join Kubota’s legacy Standard L Series compact tractor line with the addition of the L2502 and L4802 – available in either HST or gear drive transmission in 2WD or 4WD.

The L2502 and L4802 models are equipped with operational updates to optimize the overall user experience, reports Kubota. Both models feature: brakes relocated to the left side for ease of use; a new loader; and new bucket options.

In addition, the L2502 and L4802 tractors feature LED headlights and side work lights, an improved suspension seat, rubber floor mats and the option to elevate comfort (with updated arm rests) to further enhance the new, sleek styling of these machines. The L2502 HST models also feature an independent PTO switch.

Both the LX20 and L02 Series include new Trac Loader II tires made by Titan International. Kubota Tractor has entered into an exclusive agreement on select sizes of Titan’s new Trac Loader II tires for both its compact and utility tractor models.

The tires feature a modern design with improved cleanout and are optimized for performing a variety of snow, ice, turf or mud applications. Titan and Kubota’s logos are integrated into the sidewall and tread pattern of the tire.

Also Read

New Herbicide GUSS Sprayer To Be Available At Select John Deere Dealer Locations

John Deere Partners With Microsoft To Bring New Value To Dealers

New Herbicide GUSS sprayer to be available at select John Deere dealer locations

agrimachinery
-
0
New Herbicide GUSS sprayer to be available at select John Deere dealer locations

GUSS™ Automation has introduced the first and only autonomous herbicide orchard sprayer – Herbicide GUSS, available at select John Deere dealers.

This high-tech herbicide sprayer removes the driver from the vehicle to eliminate exposure to the chemical being sprayed.

A single operator can monitor any combination of up to eight GUSS, mini GUSS or Herbicide GUSS sprayers on a laptop computer from the safety of their vehicle.

With growers looking to improve productivity, increase precision and efficiency, reduce operational and overhead costs, and enhance worker safety, Herbicide GUSS is the solution to meet and exceed these needs.

Herbicide GUSS uses LIDAR technology to stay in the row. Nine sensors on the sprayer detect, target and spot spray weeds on the orchard floor, which reduces material usage and drift during application. Reducing the amount of material being sprayed increases safety for the operator, environment and food produced.

“The announcement of Herbicide GUSS underscores why we are so excited to have GUSS as part of our High Value Crop solutions portfolio,” said Greg Christensen, John Deere Marketing Manager for 5 Series Tractors and High Value Crops. “The GUSS team has years and depth of experience in the high-value crop spraying business.

They were their own first customers, so they are able to solve true customer needs very quickly. Orchard and vineyard customers in the high-value crop space face many labor, safety and sustainability challenges. GUSS, Mini GUSS and now Herbicide GUSS can help producers overcome these challenges.”

Herbicide GUSS is 23.5 ft. long, 6.5 ft. tall and ranges from 8.3 to 19 feet wide depending on the boom extension. The hydraulic-controlled, height-adjustable booms accommodate 18- to 22-foot row spacing and tilt for varying berm sizes. The breakaway booms prevent damage to trees and crops.

“Growers have been asking for an autonomous herbicide machine. We took that concept to the next level by implementing weed detection technology to give the grower a machine that provides immense value. Lower chemical usage helps the grower reduce costs and is a benefit to the environment,” said Gary Thompson, COO at GUSS Automation.

Also Read

John Deere Partners With Microsoft To Bring New Value To Dealers

Farm Machinery Manufacturer Kubota Invests In France-Based AgTech Company

John Deere brings modern cloud benefits on-premises and at the edge with hybrid data services enabled by Azure Arc

agrimachinery
-
0
John Deere brings modern cloud benefits on-premises and at the edge with hybrid data services enabled by Azure Arc

The iconic green and yellow John Deere tractors are a familiar sight in fields around the world. Through the company’s commitment to its smart industrial vision, the factories where the machines are made are being transformed.

Vast data stores fuel this effort—along with a well-stocked technology portfolio that spans cloud platforms, on-premises datacenters, and edge devices at the factories. John Deere’s modernization strategy makes the most of its assets while cultivating a path for the future.

An Azure hybrid cloud solution helps connect the dots across all these environments and puts the power of the cloud to work in the company’s existing infrastructure. The result is a unified view of operations across platforms that pivots on Azure Arc, a set of technologies that’s helping John Deere to optimize manufacturing operations. Together with Azure Arc–enabled SQL Managed Instance, the hybrid solution helps accelerate innovation and drive down operational costs.

Cloud-native patterns and practices help us deliver the factory solutions that are a key to our future success. Azure Arc–enabled data services help make this possible for us.

Jason Wallin: Principal Architect

John Deere

Acres of data at an agricultural giant

From the invention of the first commercially successful steel plow in 1837 to the current-day use of connected robots, John Deere puts innovation—and terabytes of precision data—to use in making its customers successful. According to Jason Wallin, Principal Architect for Infrastructure and Operations at John Deere, “In agriculture, it’s really only John Deere that seamlessly connects machines, people, technology, and insights to give our customers the advantage.”

That advantage is based in research that shows the value of big data in giving farmers a competitive edge. Farming faces huge challenges from volatile weather, weeds, pests, and diminishing resources. For the last decade, John Deere has helped customers collect and use data related to many aspects of their work—from weather and soil conditions to the equipment life cycle. Farmers use this information to manage their fleets, improve productivity, and create a sustainable living for today’s farming generation and for those of the future.

With so much data distributed across locations worldwide, it’s no longer business as usual at the 185-year-old company. “We’re always looking for ways to optimize our use of technology and help our customers with the challenges they face,” Wallin says.

Cloud modernization inspires on-premises aspirations

The company began exploring new strategies to support its digital goals and started an internal initiative to modernize IT.

“To create these digital solutions, we have to manage and process terabytes and terabytes of data,” notes Pinkal Patel, a Solution Architect in John Deere’s Infrastructure and Architecture organization. “Putting so much data into a datacenter is a challenge to scale and manage since those databases are dispersed across our worldwide locations. As we looked ahead, we were thinking, ‘How are we going to scale this?’”

Big data has a big footprint at John Deere, spanning multiple datacenters, cloud platforms, and factories around the world. The company runs thousands of Microsoft SQL Server Enterprise Edition databases in all sizes. They support mission-critical business and financial systems, homegrown apps, and everything in between. A specialized team manages it all.

Patel led a cross-functional team of John Deere subject matter experts. “We were looking at using the cloud to provide modernization, but we also wanted to do that with our on-premises tech, as well,” he explains.

The team included Group Engineering Manager Murali Subramanian, who manages mainframe infrastructure services and on-premises databases for John Deere. The extensive SQL Server environment is his team’s domain. As he recalls, “We wanted a solution that would allow us to manage resources that are on-premises and also in the cloud through a single control plane.”

Patel, Subramanian, and their colleagues found the solution with these capabilities when Microsoft announced Azure Arc, a set of technologies that unify on-premises, hybrid, and cross-cloud infrastructures, pushing the benefits of cloud platform as a service (PaaS)—such as data services—to local datacenters. Azure Arc-enabled data services provide elastic scale, built-in business continuity features like high availability and disaster recovery, and unified management for data workloads with or without direct Azure connection.

According to Patel, “We were looking for a solution to provide a cloud-like experience for on-prem resources when the private preview of Azure Arc–enabled data services was announced. We realized that it could help support our modernization journey. We were one of the early adopters.”

Azure Arc–enabled data services is a tool we’re using to help us achieve our goals in modernizing our IT environment to support the John Deere tech stack.

Pinkal Patel: Solution Architect

John Deere

A move to modernize using Azure Arc–enabled data services

Azure Arc–enabled SQL Managed Instance and Azure Arc–enabled PostgreSQL Hyperscale are designed for hybrid work environments. They provide the benefits of a fully managed data service and cloud-like elasticity across environments, whether on-premises, in the cloud, or at the edge. Data services are also evergreen—automatic updates are applied according to the company’s policies, so John Deere no longer faces end-of-support disruption.

“That feature alone really simplified the patch and update model for us,” recalls Wallin.

For John Deere, Azure Arc–enabled SQL Managed Instance bridges the gap between cloud and on-premises operations. Designed to run in containers on Kubernetes, Azure Arc–enabled SQL Managed Instance is a service that can be created on John Deere’s existing infrastructure. It comes from the same code base that powers the core Microsoft SQL engine. The common features make it straightforward for the John Deere teams to lift their existing SQL Server workloads with minimal application and database changes and shift them to Azure Arc–enabled SQL Managed Instance running in their existing Kubernetes distribution. The teams install a set of code in their development environment, including an Azure Arc data controller that operates as the local control plane for any data management operations.

“In our on-premises Kubernetes cluster, we quickly started provisioning our first data controller node and created the first instance,” Patel reports. The teams also tested performance, comparing a workload running on SQL Server to Azure Arc–enabled SQL Managed Instance. Performance was comparable or better with the new approach.

Initially, the engineers looked to Microsoft for help. “That engagement was very helpful when we started, and we soon got the hang of it,” Patel notes. Diving deeper into the capabilities, the team began exploring how to add scale and connect to the existing continuous integration and continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines based on Azure DevOps and Azure Pipelines.

Wallin notes that they can run modern, cloud-native patterns within Kubernetes using the company’s existing hardware and facilities. “Azure Arc gives us modularity. We can deploy everything via infrastructure as code, much as we can in the cloud.”

That means developers at John Deere can meet the needs of manufacturing even faster. Using Azure Resource Manager templates, they can create databases on demand. “Now the product groups don’t need to go through a central IT team to provision resources,” Patel explains. “With Azure Arc, it’s truly self-service.”

Azure Arc SQL Managed Instance has an impact not only on the on-premises datacenter but also on the future use cases it enables as we deploy more and more technologies into our factories.

Pinkal Patel: Solution Architect

John Deere

Unified management across environments

The modernization project gave John Deere a unified view of all the relational databases and data assets deployed with Azure Arc, even those in factories. Now the company can gradually phase out many of the monitoring and management tools it was using. Fewer software licenses translate into significant cost savings over time. The company can allocate its resources to more valuable tasks and make better use of staff time. Through Azure Arc, IT administrators also get logs and telemetry from Kubernetes, helping them to analyze the underlying infrastructure capacity and health.

“When you’re physically sending support people out to all the locations where we run SQL Server, it just doesn’t scale,” explains Patel. Azure Arc provides a single pane of glass—that is, one control plane that enables the company to manage its global environments efficiently.

Azure Arc also helps John Deere meet its high governance and compliance standards for apps, infrastructure, and data. Patel observes that it’s one thing to deploy policies consistently in a single datacenter—and another thing entirely in John Deere’s hybrid environment.

“With Azure Arc, we’ll be able to successfully deploy and manage our environments very effectively,” he adds.

Meanwhile, the IT administrators responsible for day-to-day management of the company’s SQL Server environments are getting a reprieve. “They’ll have more interesting things to do,” Wallin suggests, “and can move up the stack to work on automation, container management, and more exciting technologies.”

With Azure Arc, we’ll be able to successfully deploy and manage our environments effectively.

Pinkal Patel: Solution Architect

John Deere

The smart industrial journey continues

The journey continues as John Deere teams continue to roll out Azure Arc–enabled data services. “Every factory is part of the company’s smart industrial focus by deploying operation technologies,” Patel offers. “We foresee the need to deploy local SQL Server instances, the compute, and the applications in these factories to support this initiative.”

As early adopters, John Deere provided valuable input to the Microsoft product team. “We gave feedback to Microsoft about the features that were important for us,” Patel explains.

The team’s advice for other companies? Shift to cloud-first thinking and infrastructure as code. “There was a learning curve for our infrastructure teams in moving to the mindset of the cloud,” Patel remembers, “but we overcame that. The teams now know the value of infrastructure as code and managing the environment effectively.”

Effective management includes the benefit of exchanging upfront IT capital expenditures (CapEx) for the more predictable operational expenditure (OpEx) model that comes with cloud computing services. “With a pay-as-you-go model, we expect to realize cost savings,” Patel reports.

Wallin concludes, “It certainly is a very, very bright future for John Deere. Given our goals—implementing our smart industrial redesign and modernizing our factory operations—we can’t keep doing business the way we’ve always done it. We’re using technology to successfully deploy and manage our environments very effectively.”

Now the product groups don’t need to go through a central IT team to provision resources…. With Azure Arc, it’s truly self-service.

Pinkal Patel: Solution Architect

John Deere

Also Read

John Deere Partners With Microsoft To Bring New Value To Dealers

Farm Machinery Manufacturer Kubota Invests In France-Based AgTech Company

John Deere partners with Microsoft to bring new value to Dealers

agrimachinery
-
0
John Deere partners with Microsoft to bring new value to Dealers

John Deere is launching a new dealer business system using Microsoft Dynamics 365.

The system will provide a common technology platform for many aspects of a dealer’s business, enabling new opportunities for growth, innovation, and customer insights for dealers.

Both companies will use their expertise to deliver this new and innovative technology.

The Dynamics 365 platform is a powerful foundation for the next generation dealer business system, with the ability to be configured based on customer needs. The technology aligns with John Deere’s Smart Industrial strategy and digitalization efforts of the company and John Deere dealers.

“We are positioning dealers to align with Deere’s growing focus on technology and unlocking value for our customers,” said Siva Ganesh, vice president, John Deere Global IT. “This new, common dealer business platform will allow John Deere and our dealers to engage with each other more efficiently and gain new insights.”

John Deere’s network of independent dealers have delivered market-leading customer support for decades. Now, by pairing John Deere’s products and innovation with a more efficient and integrated technology platform the dealer network will be enabled to realize:

  • Growth through deep and actionable customer and market understanding
  • Increased operational performance through efficient processes and trusted insights
  • Enhanced system capabilities, security, scalability, and mobility
  • Exceptional and consistent customer experiences with John Deere products and services

To support these outcomes, Dynamics 365 applications will seamlessly integrate John Deere dealers’ sales, rental, aftermarket, and administrative capabilities to enable higher levels of process automation and insights for decision making.

“With Microsoft Dynamics 365, all key parts of the dealership will be connected,” said Ray Smith, Vice President, Supply Chain, Business Application and Platform, Microsoft. “Dealers will be empowered to collaborate across locations and departments. They’ll have the insights to make critical decisions, take advantage of new trends, disrupt, adapt, and reimagine what’s possible. It will also enable them to develop a more effective and efficient ecosystem to anticipate needs and take care of their customers.”

The Dynamics 365-based dealer business system is currently being developed and will have a multi-year rollout.

Also Read

Farm Machinery Manufacturer Kubota Invests In France-Based AgTech Company

New Herbicide GUSS sprayer to be available at select John Deere dealer locations

1...57585960Page 58 of 60

Quick Links

Top categories

Our Media Network

CCE NEWS – Construction & Engineering News
The Africa Logistics – Transport & Supply Chain
Linkbly – Digital Advertising & Link Building

Newslatter

Contacts

Editorial: editor@agrimachinery.africa
Advertising: ads@agrimachinery.africa
Guest Posts: marketing@agrimachinery.africa
News Tips: news@agrimachinery.africa

Follow Us

© 2026 Agrimachinery Africa. All Rights Reserved.
Africa’s trusted source for agricultural machinery, farm equipment, and agribusiness technology news.