Home Agribusiness Technology in the classification of grains can raise producer income

Technology in the classification of grains can raise producer income



The evaluation by means of subjectivity reduces the value of the production in the delivery of the product.

The field is currently experiencing a series of problems that affect productivity, raise costs and decrease the income of producers. In discussions with producers, AgriHub, a network that aims to bring technology to the field, has detected at least 30 problems for producers in the development of a crop.

Only the two main ones on the list – handful of pests, diseases and weeds and subjectivity in the classification – generate losses of R $ 5.3 billion for the producer per crop.

The one with the greatest negative effect on the pockets of the product is subjectivity in the classification of grains. In this case, the producer stops receiving at least R $ 3.1 billion per harvest.

The second major problem noted in the field are the difficulties encountered by the producer in the management of pests, diseases and weeds. In that case, the extra expenses of the producer can reach R $ 2.2 billion.

In both cases, the use of appropriate technologies would prevent such accentuated extra expenses or loss of profitability, according to Fábio Silva, association analyst at AgriHub.

A third problem pointed out by the producers is the lack of connectivity in the field, which inhibits the use of technology.

“It’s like the producer having a Ferrari and using dirt roads,” says Silva. Some technological options are available, but there are no means of being transmitted to the field.

Antonio Morelli, partner of Agronow, believes that the connectivity situation is critical, but should change in the coming years. The communications are outdated in the field because the demand for the service has always been low. The scenario begins to change and, with the increase in demand for these services, companies will also return to the field.

Luiz Fernando Sá, from Plant Project and StartAgro, says that this advance in technology in the field is irreversible, and Brazil will be a great market for companies. Which has become one of the oldest in the world.

Brazil has advantages in adopting rural technology, according to Fabiana Alves of Rabobank. One of the examples is the closed one. In addition, the time is special for the arrival of technology in the field due to the greater presence of young people in agriculture. They are more prone to innovations and uses of technologies.

Morelli adds that until 2010 the technology referential was the one that came embedded in agricultural machines. As a result, digital technology was adopted. It is a moment of transition and barriers for both sides: field and companies.

The executive of Rabobank says that the adoption of technology is being fast, but the conversion is not yet a concrete fact. Producers need to better evaluate new technologies and investors in these companies must make their value propositions clear.

Who uses more technology in the field? The answer for Brazil remains uncertain, but in Australia a survey indicates that there is a different correlation of achievement. The most used are the large and small producers, according to Alves.

The big producers use these new resources because they have more facilities. The little ones, because they need results for survival.

For Sérgio Marcus Barbosa, from EsalqTec, technology in the field is important because it brings sustainability, both environmentally and socially and financially.