When I first entered the startup world, like many others, I was convinced that the holy grail of innovation was Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). The logic was simple: SaaS is scalable, asset-light, and investor-friendly. But experience has taught me that impact—real, tangible change—often comes not from what’s hosted in the cloud, but from what reaches the ground.

In emerging markets like Indonesia, startups that deal with physical products often face more friction—regulatory, logistical, or financial. Yet it is these startups that are bridging the most vital sectors of our time: agriculture and healthcare. They don’t just solve problems; they solve survival.

The overlooked power of physical innovation

Today, food security and public health are no longer siloed issues. They’re deeply interconnected. According to the World Bank, disruptions in agriculture directly undermine nutritional access, increasing the burden on already strained health systems. Meanwhile, the World Health Organisation emphasises the importance of food systems in preventing malnutrition and diet-related illnesses.

In this context, startups that innovate in the overlap between these sectors—what I call the AgriHealth frontier—are not only relevant, they are essential. Imagine IoT-enabled soil sensors that optimise micronutrient delivery in crops, or solar-powered cold chains that transport vaccines and fresh produce to remote areas. These aren’t futuristic dreams—they’re prototypes being tested today.

Why the world still needs physical products

The startup world’s obsession with SaaS has, to some extent, blinded us to the enduring value of hardware and physical goods. But here’s the truth: in many rural regions, digital-only solutions fall flat. Farmers need sensors they can touch, irrigation pumps they can repair, and clinics need mobile diagnostic kits that work offline.

Also Read: Unlocking agritech’s potential: Can Southeast Asia rise to the challenge?

The World Economic Forum highlights that hybrid solutions—integrating digital tools with physical infrastructure—are driving the next wave of social innovation, especially in food and health security. Startups that combine data-driven insights with deployable products are not only viable—they’re resilient.

Startups in the middle

We are seeing a new breed of entrepreneurs emerge. They don’t call themselves “agritech” or “healthtech.” They build solutions where tractors meet tablets, where wearable devices meet water pumps. These are startups that operate at the intersection, the Venn diagram middle, where creativity meets critical need.

And yes, their products are often physical.

The human side of innovation

As a founder, I’ve seen first-hand the trust a community places in something they can see, feel, and use. A farmer may not fully grasp blockchain, but she understands a smart scale that tells her when to harvest. A clinic in a remote area may not be paperless, but it will embrace a low-cost diagnostic device if it saves lives.

Innovation is not just about disruption—it’s about empathy. It’s about meeting people where they are.

In closing: It’s time to rethink what’s “sexy”

Let’s stop thinking SaaS is the only smart choice. Let’s start building what the world actually needs. At the heart of food systems, climate resilience, and health equity lies a quiet truth: physical solutions are not outdated—they’re just underfunded and underestimated.

And in the era of AgriHealth, they may just be our best hope.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Join us on Instagram, Facebook, X, LinkedIn, and our WA community to stay connected.

Image credit: Canva Pro

The post SaaS isn’t always the answer: The case for physical innovation in developing economies appeared first on e27.

The recent closure of Jiva, a venture that reached over 200,000 farmers and created more than 600 jobs, marked the end of a chapter in agri-venture building in Southeast Asia. While some might view it as just another corporate experiment that didn’t succeed, doing so would overlook its contributions and the lessons it leaves behind.

In today’s environment of constant disruption, stepping back entirely from innovation carries its own risks. The real challenge for corporations is to make their innovation processes more efficient, effective, and resilient—so they can build new businesses that thrive in tomorrow’s markets.

Unlike VC-backed startups such as Crowde or even eFishery, Jiva was a bold corporate-led effort to reimagine how farmers in Southeast and South Asia could access services. It was endowed with resources and talent, an ambitious venture that ultimately cost its corporate sponsor more than US$100m over five years.

And even though it didn’t reach its full potential, Jiva leaves us with important lessons for the next wave of corporate venture building as well as hints of an answer to the question on the minds of every executive: how do we achieve more with less?

What Jiva revealed

Jiva was conceived in a different time: easy money, high-risk appetite, and a preference for growth over validation. As the funding climate shifted, the model came under strain and exposed some important realities:

• Big spending alone isn’t a shortcut. While resources matter, heavy upfront investment and reliance on consultancies can sometimes create distance from the market, making it harder to adapt. While at the same time reduces the ability of institutional investors to justify significant early spend without traction.
• Overhead must match the stage. Large teams and high-cost structures can put too much pressure on ventures that are still finding product-market fit. And, specifically for agriculture, they often miss the fact that real impact is done on the ground and not in an HQ in a country away.
• Subsidies aren’t a long-term solution. Farmers appreciated short-term benefits, but long-term traction only comes from solving real pain points. This is true in every industry, but especially with those dealing with cutthroat competition like agri distribution. In Southeast Asia, rice subsidy programs have shown limited sustainable impact on productivity, prompting calls for more enduring, market-based solutions.

Rather than being a failure, Jiva provided a live stress test for a certain approach to venture building—and showed why a new playbook is needed.

Also Read: The agritech challenge in Indonesia: Can AI and mobile apps enhance productivity?

What the next playbook looks like

If Jiva were launched today, it would likely look quite different. Corporates entering this space can take away some clear principles:

• Start lean, think like startups. Small bets, early proof, and traction as the real validation. A corporate startup should be able to leverage its corporate advantages and leverage it to be as cost-efficient as possible, rivalling a venture in the wild capital efficiency. Spending money in the early days should be around pilots and not decks.
• Choose partners who share the risk. Collaboration works best when incentives are aligned and everyone has skin in the game. Venture Builders partnering with corporations should offer more than slides, and be willing to invest in their work.
• Stay close to the ground. In agriculture, credibility comes from rolling up sleeves and working alongside farmers. More than 80 per cent of Southeast Asia’s farmers are smallholders, operating on less than two hectares. Reaching them requires hyper-local trust, which can’t be built from a distant HQ. Normally, high level personnel is used to managing a large team and not spending time on the ground. 
• Fund with discipline. Stage-gated capital, realistic milestones, and equity structures that drive accountability. PitchBook data shows corporate venture funding fell 35 per cent in 2023 as boards demanded tighter capital discipline. Stage-gated funding mirrors this new normal. Over spending without a view towards profit belongs to the previous era of VC (an era I hope does not come back again), and corporates especially can be more disciplined in how they manage a new business funding.
• Focus on solving pain points. Sustainable models don’t rely on subsidies; they rely on real value creation.

Also Read: Why agritech is the key to Asia’s food security

Why corporates still matter

Despite the challenges, corporations remain uniquely positioned to help tackle agriculture’s biggest issues. Their networks, balance sheets, and deep industry knowledge can give new ventures an edge that startups alone can’t achieve. But that edge only exists if it translates into faster, cheaper, and more effective execution than what a startup could do “in the wild.”

Jiva also showed how that edge can be dulled when overhead grows or distance from the market increases.

The opportunity now is to reset the model: build leaner, partner smarter, and focus relentlessly on genuine farmer impact.

Jiva should be remembered not only as an ending, but as a significant effort that provides valuable lessons for the next era of corporate venture building in agriculture.

Done right, corporations can still play a decisive role in creating ventures that deliver both returns and resilience for the region’s food systems. 

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: Canva

The post Jiva’s story: A turning point for corporate venture building in agriculture appeared first on e27.

According to calculations from Our World in Data, the global population grew by 31 per cent between 2000 and 2023, while global rice production increased by 33.7 per cent. Meanwhile, these figures suggest that rice productivity has outpaced population growth over the past 23 years, but they do not guarantee food security by 2050.

A report by the World Resources Institute (WRI) Indonesia indicates that agricultural productivity must increase by at least 100 per cent to meet global food demand by 2050. Without optimisation, food scarcity and hunger could worsen due to uneven distribution, climate challenges, declining agricultural labour, and varying productivity across regions.

For instance, Thailand faces a shrinking young farmer population (ages 15–40), which dropped from 48 per cent in 2013 to 32 per cent of total farmers, alongside severe droughts in areas like Phi Phi Island, Pattaya, and Koh Chang. 

The Philippines struggles with climate volatility, leading to erratic harvests and suboptimal land use. 

Indonesia grapples with small-scale farming dominance, declining generational turnover in agriculture, and poor market access for farmers.

On the other side, according to the graphic above, Southeast Asia leads global rice production, followed by Africa, the Americas, Europe, and Australia. Countries like Vietnam, Thailand, and Cambodia are key exporters, making regional production stability critical for domestic and international supply chains.

However, achieving global food security requires tailored solutions for each region. Technological adaptation and not just adoption is basically the key to reaching the ultimate goal, that is food security.

The role of localised agritech in boosting productivity and distribution

Farming tech is getting smarter, but for many Indonesian farmers, it’s still out of reach.

The problem is not that they do not want it; it’s that the price tag can be jaw-dropping. FlyeEye, for instance, says a sprayer drone costs around US$18,000–22,000 (IDR 290–350 million), while a crop-monitoring drone is about US$13,000–15,000 (IDR 211–244 million).

Also Read: Why agritech startups will call for the next e-commerce revolution

With costs like these, smallholders are often locked out of the tech revolution. Many still rely on traditional methods such as planting, watering, and harvesting in ways that can be time-consuming, less efficient, and harder to sustain in the long run

This is why the real conversation shouldn’t just be about which technology to use, but how to make it accessible and relevant. For example:

• Precision farming: Instead of pricey sensor networks, farmers can use smartphone-based mapping apps, shared sensors, or low-cost soil test kits.
• Smart irrigation: Full IoT setups are great, but smaller options like solar pumps, moisture controllers, or community-managed systems are more realistic.
• Digital marketplaces: Fancy apps work best when paired with simple solutions like SMS ordering, e-vouchers, or local aggregation points.
• Post-harvest tech: Community cold rooms, pay-per-use storage, or solar dryers can do a lot without the massive upfront cost.

The key is finding the right mix of tech, financing models, and local know-how, whether that’s renting equipment, joining a cooperative, or paying only when you use the service. After all, one size doesn’t fit farms; what works for a Sumatra rice farmer won’t necessarily suit a Thai sugarcane grower or a Filipino coconut producer.

With 62 per cent of Indonesia’s farmers operating at a small-scale level, we face a significant structural challenge in agricultural development. These smallholder farmers typically focus on immediate, short-term gains and use harvest income primarily for daily subsistence rather than reinvesting in future production cycles. This subsistence mindset creates a critical barrier to developing sustainable farming businesses.

To address this challenge, comprehensive intervention programs are needed. Reliable institutions including agribusinesses, startups, and vocational training centers, must take an active role in providing ongoing mentorship, promoting sustainable business practices, enhancing financial literacy, and teaching business scalability principles.

These efforts are crucial because many smallholder farmers currently lack understanding of long-term investment returns, less knowledge of business growth strategies, and minimal access to financial management tools.

Also Read: Revitalising Indonesian agriculture: Unlocking potential through practical technology innovation

By implementing these educational initiatives, we can help transition subsistence farming into viable, growth-oriented agricultural enterprises.

On the distribution front, supply chains play a critical role in ensuring agricultural products reach people’s tables. In line with the SDGs’ goal to strengthen food security, it is equally important to ensure that distribution processes are efficient. In a geographically complex country like Indonesia, which consists of thousands of islands, distribution presents a major challenge. 

Even established agri-e-commerce platforms such as Sayurbox and Segari currently operate only in select cities and have yet to reach the broader Indonesian market, largely due to geographic barriers. Additionally, the high costs of maintaining production facilities, warehouses, and delivery systems often push these platforms to focus only on cities with stronger purchasing power, where the returns justify the budget and effort. Expanding into smaller cities would make the costs disproportionate to the potential gains.

This situation highlights the urgent need for more localised platforms to emerge across different regions to bridge the gap. 

Moreover, this gap highlights the critical need for investment to support small-scale farmers, improve productivity, and ensure long-term agricultural sustainability.

Investor’s role: Social and economic impact

Investors like impact funds, angel investors, and VCs can drive scalable agri-tech solutions with dual benefits:

Social impact

• Strengthens local food resilience and reduces import dependency.
• Attracts youth to farming through tech-driven opportunities (e.g., drones, AI).
• Boosts rural economies via digital literacy and job creation.

Economic impact

• Taps into underserved smallholder markets with high ROI potential.
• Streamlines supply chains, increasing margins for farmers and startups.
• Enables regional scaling across SEA due to shared agricultural challenges.

On the other hand, to have a good risk mitigation system for investors there has to be something like conducting rigorous due diligence, including on-site visits to verify operations. Then, monitor farmer-business partnerships and audit financial health via third parties. After that, acknowledge seasonal fluctuations and profitability isn’t always linear.

Preparing for 2050 is not only about higher yields but it is about smarter farming and fairer distribution. Southeast Asia doesn’t need imported fixes; it needs homegrown innovations built by those who understand its fields, weather, and markets.

—

The post Homegrown solutions for a hungry future: Why Southeast Asia must localise agritech by 2050 appeared first on e27.

Thailand’s agricultural struggles ripple far beyond its borders. As global rice prices surge 47 per cent following climate disruptions and geopolitical instability from the Ukraine conflict, Thailand’s productivity stagnation carries implications beyond domestic food security. The kingdom’s 3.1 tons per hectare yield represents lost export revenue of approximately US$2.3 billion annually compared to Vietnam’s efficiency rates, according to commodity trading data.

This productivity gap undermines Thailand’s position as the world’s third-largest rice exporter at a critical moment when global food systems face unprecedented strain. While competitors like Vietnam achieve 5.8 tons per hectare through targeted agritech investments, Thailand’s billion-dollar Smart Farmer program has delivered minimal returns — a cautionary tale as global agricultural investment climbs to 43 billion annually.

The paradox of connected farming

Farmers like Somchai Thanakit, a third-generation rice farmer in Thailand’s Pathum Thani province, embody the paradox facing countless smallholders caught between the promises and pitfalls of digital farming. He owns a smartphone worth more than his monthly income.

Through government programs and private partnerships—most notably Kasetsart University’s SMART Platform—his 2.3-hectare plot has been introduced to ‘smart’ tools: soil sensors measuring moisture, satellite imagery used to track crop health, and mobile apps providing weather and market updates.

Yet Thanakit’s yields have stagnated at 3.2 tons per hectare for three consecutive seasons—well below the 5.5-ton national target and far from Vietnam’s average of 5.8 tons per hectare, according to FAO statistics.

“I get so many notifications, I don’t know which ones to trust,” says Thanakit, echoing a sentiment heard across Asia’s rice bowls. “My father knew when to plant by watching the sky. Now I have five apps telling me different things.”

This disconnect between digital promise and agricultural reality represents a broader crisis in Asia’s approach to agricultural modernization.

The scale of misalignment

Since 2010, ASEAN countries have invested approximately US$180 billion in agricultural modernisation initiatives, including digital infrastructure, according to the Asian Development Bank’s agricultural investment database.

Since 2017, Thailand has channeled an estimated US$12 billion into transforming its agricultural sector, a cornerstone of the nation’s ‘Thailand 4.0’ strategy. A significant portion of this investment has been directed towards government-led initiatives, most notably the ‘Smart Farmer’ program.

Also Read: Indonesia’s agritech landscape: Keys to building a scalable agriculture startup

Despite this investment, productivity gains remain modest. Thailand’s agricultural Total Factor Productivity (TFP) grew just 0.8 per cent annually between 2015-2023, according to World Bank data—insufficient to meet the 2.1 per cent growth needed to ensure food security for Asia’s growing population by 2050, as outlined in the International Rice Research Institute’s latest projections.

The problem is particularly acute among smallholders, who represent 80 per cent of Asia’s 200 million farm households but receive less than 15 per cent of agritech investment, according to McKinsey’s 2023 agriculture report.

Thailand’s digital divide

Thailand exemplifies both the promise and the shortcomings of agricultural digitalisation. As the world’s third-largest rice exporter and the global leader in durian exports, the kingdom also holds dominant positions in rubber, cassava, and tropical fruit markets. Its agricultural sector employs 32 per cent of the workforce and contributes 8.2 per cent to GDP.

Yet productivity lags. Thai rice yields average 3.1 tons per hectare compared to China’s 6.7 tons and Vietnam’s 5.8 tons, according to FAOSTAT 2023 data. Post-harvest losses in fruits exceed 30 per cent, and 40 per cent of smallholder farmers remain without access to formal extension services, according to Thailand’s Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives.

The government’s response has been to digitalise. The Smart Farmer program, launched in 2017, aims to connect 2.8 million farmers through mobile platforms providing weather data, market prices, and agricultural advice. To date, 1.2 million farmers have registered, but active usage remains below 25 per cent, according to program data obtained through freedom of information requests.

The design problem

The core issue isn’t technological but anthropological. Most agritech platforms are designed by urban engineers for farmers they’ve never met, creating tools that are technically sophisticated but practically useless. This is starkly evident in Thailand’s own flagship digital initiatives.

For example, the government’s Smart Farmer program provides a platform with weather data and market prices, yet less than 25 per cent of its 1.2 million registered users are active. The reason is not a lack of technology, but a failure of design.

Farmers like Thanakit are left overwhelmed by multiple, often conflicting, notifications rather than being empowered with clear, actionable advice. The platforms create information overload instead of solving problems. It exemplifies a challenge common across the sector: building digital ‘Ferraris’ for farmers who simply need reliable ‘bicycles’ to address their immediate, practical needs.

Algorithmic dependency

The digitalisation push has created new vulnerabilities. When severe flooding disrupted internet connectivity across central Thailand in October 2023, thousands of farmers lost access to planting schedules and irrigation controls managed through cloud-based systems.

This highlights what agricultural economists call “algorithmic dependency”—the gradual erosion of traditional farming knowledge as decisions migrate to digital platforms. A 2023 study by Kasetsart University found that farmers using automated irrigation systems for more than three years showed decreased ability to manually assess soil moisture compared to control groups

This creates a fundamental paradox: digital tools designed to enhance productivity may actually undermine the agricultural autonomy and traditional expertise that enable farmers to adapt to changing conditions

The challenge extends beyond simple technology adoption to questions of whether sustainable productivity gains can coexist with the preservation of essential farming skills “We’re creating digital sharecroppers,” warns Dr. Nipon Poapongsakorn, a agricultural economist at the Thailand Development Research Institute. “Farmers become dependent on platforms they don’t control, using algorithms they don’t understand.”

Promising alternatives

Some startups are pursuing different approaches. Bangkok Silicon, a Thai agritech startup founded in 2021, has completed development of voice-based solutions in local dialects and is preparing for distribution to farmers across Thailand. Their AI assistant “BKS Agrichat, tentatively called “Kruu Naa”,” trained through extensive field research with farming families across dozens of provinces. It provides simple binary recommendations rather than complex data dashboards.

Also Read: How Southeast Asia’s agritech startups are turning smallholder farms into high-tech powerhouses

Similarly, India’s CropIn has developed “contextual intelligence” systems that consider local farming practices, weather patterns, and cultural preferences.

Policy recommendations

Addressing agricultural digitalisation’s failures requires systemic changes:

• Farmer-centred design: Mandate user research with actual farmers before deploying digital tools. The Thai government should establish design standards requiring extensive field testing with target users.
• Local data sovereignty: Critical agricultural data should be stored and processed within national borders. Thailand’s proposed Personal Data Protection Act should include specific provisions for agricultural data.
• Integration over innovation: Rather than launching new platforms, focus on integrating existing tools with established systems like cooperatives, banks, and extension services.
• Digital literacy investment: Expand rural digital education beyond basic smartphone use to include critical evaluation of digital information—essential as farmers navigate competing recommendations.

The path forward

Agricultural digitalisation isn’t inherently flawed, but its current trajectory serves technology companies more than farmers. Success requires shifting from technology-push to demand-pull innovation, prioritising farmer autonomy over data collection.

Thailand, with its strong agricultural base and growing tech sector, is well-positioned to lead this transition. But it must abandon the assumption that more technology automatically means better farming.

The goal shouldn’t be to make farmers more digital, but to make digital tools more agricultural. Only then can Asia’s agricultural revolution move from the conference room to the rice field.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: DALL-E

The post Digital farming’s false promise: Why Asia’s US$180B bet on agritech-driven farming is failing smallholders appeared first on e27.

We’ve witnessed firsthand how a new generation of entrepreneurs in Southeast Asia (SEA) is redefining success. Growth is no longer measured solely by speed or scale, but by the depth of impact. The shift from asking ‘How fast can it scale?’ to ‘How meaningful is its contribution?’ is a growing debate in Southeast Asia, one that is increasingly shaping how entrepreneurs, investors, and policymakers define success.

Across the region, impact-oriented investors are increasingly adopting a ‘Theory of Change’ approach that channels capital toward technology solutions addressing Southeast Asia’s most pressing challenges. At TNB Aura, this lens guides much of our investment activity. Based on our 2024 Impact Report, our largest investment sectors are 37 per cent consumer and retail/e-commerce, 23 per cent agritech, 13 per cent edutech, and 12 per cent healthtech, reflecting the areas where technology is delivering the most meaningful and measurable impact.

Consumer and retail: Breaking access barriers

Across SEA, millions living outside Tier 1 cities face limited access to basic goods and services. Infrastructure gaps mean essentials cost more and are harder to find, leaving underserved communities at a disadvantage.

Without innovation, this inequality would persist. Super is changing that through its social commerce group-buy model, which aggregates community demand to lower prices and improve distribution. In 2024, Super engaged more than 40,000 active agents coordinating group buying and end consumers who purchased directly from the platform. By reimagining last-mile access, Super has enabled goods that were once out of reach to become part of everyday life for households in remote areas.

Agritech: Building resilient food systems

Millions of small-scale farmers form the backbone of SEA’s food supply, yet most remain trapped by systemic inefficiencies. Left unaddressed, these challenges would continue to depress productivity and incomes.

In agritech, new digital platforms are flipping this reality, creating market access and supply chain efficiencies. TNB Aura’s portfolio companies, such as Eratani and Techcoop, are among those helping farmers secure fairer prices and more sustainable practices. In 2024, Techcoop improved the livelihoods of 233,250 farmers through expanded market access and input financing. Collectively, our portfolio has supported 209,000 small-scale enterprises, many of them farmers now participating in more equitable and efficient food systems.

Also Read: Built for all or built to fail? Why tech for social impact must start with inclusion

Edutech: Expanding quality learning

For students across SEA, geography and cost have long dictated educational opportunity. The challenge is not just about access, but about the quality of education available to students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. Without intervention, this gap would only widen with each generation.

Edutech innovators across the region are tackling this challenge head-on. One example is VUIHOC, which delivers affordable online learning to underserved students in Vietnam. Its dual-teacher live-streamed classes reach nearly 2,000 students at once, while its AI-powered platform personalises learning and provides an extensive library of resources to over a million more each year, demonstrating how tech can fundamentally transform a country’s educational landscape.

Healthtech: Closing the care gap

Healthcare inequality is one of SEA’s starkest divides. Rural and remote communities often lack access to even the most basic consultations, forcing patients to travel long distances or go untreated.

Technology has emerged as one of the most powerful tools for democratising healthcare in Southeast Asia. Our portfolio includes companies like Ora, which leverage digital platforms to expand access, offering affordable, timely medical consultations and delivering essential supplies that would otherwise remain out of reach. Ora delivered 63,750 online consultations in 2024.

Also Read: Why investors are betting big on Asia’s social impact startups

A deliberate and data-driven approach to impact

These individual successes point to a broader, deliberate trend: investments in the region are increasingly aligned with both financial value creation and measurable impact. Looking ahead, investors are doubling down on development-eligible countries and climate resilience, with many, including TNB Aura, allocating significant capital to these priorities.

We challenge the traditional view that impact investing is a concession. Instead, we see it as the most strategic and sustainable way to build category-defining businesses in the region. By focusing on the sectors that truly matter and by backing the founders who are solving real problems, we are not just investing in companies; we are investing in a better future for Southeast Asia.

This article was co-authored by Amanda Nway Htwe, Corporate Development and Sustainability Manager at TNB Aura, and Jessie Cruz, Value Creation Analyst at TNB Aura.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: DALL-E

The post A new era of impact: Beyond the bottom line in Southeast Asia’s tech revolution appeared first on e27.

Southeast Asia’s cybersecurity ecosystem is rapidly gaining momentum, driven by rising digital adoption, expanding attack surfaces, and growing demand for stronger cyber resilience across industries.

From incident response and threat intelligence to fraud prevention, identity security, and zero-trust infrastructure, a new wave of startups is stepping up to address the region’s evolving security challenges.

Also Read: How cybersecurity crises are redefining corporate accountability

The following companies represent some of the region’s promising and fast-growing players, building cutting-edge solutions to protect enterprises, governments, and consumers in an increasingly high-stakes digital landscape.

1. Blackpanda

 

2. CYFIRMA

 

3. Secuna

 

4. Peris.ai

 

5. Scantist

 

6. Riskimmune

 

7. Horangi Cyber Security

 

8. InsiderSecurity

 

9. Swarmnetics

 

10. Heron Cybersecurity

 

11. i-Sprint Innovations

 

12. Forter

 

13. SecurityBox

 

14. Flexxon

 

15. TurisVPN

 

16. SecureMetric

 

17. ArmourZero

 

18. watchTowr

 

19. SafeSync

 

20. Fazpass

 

21. Shield

 

22. Finema

 

23. SILENT EIGHT

 

24. Tookitaki

 

25. Microsec

 

The image was generated using AI

—

The post From fraud fighters to zero-trust builders: SEA’s cyber stars appeared first on e27.

Singapore businesses are moving quickly in AI adoption, but growing data complexity and cybersecurity concerns could limit long-term returns, according to new research from Hitachi Vantara.

The data storage, infrastructure and hybrid cloud management subsidiary of Hitachi Ltd. released its findings in the Hitachi Vantara State of Data Infrastructure 2025 Report, a global study examining how organisations are preparing their data environments to support AI at scale.

The report is based on a survey of more than 1,200 C-level executives and senior IT leaders across 15 markets worldwide. The Asia and Oceania sample included 425 respondents, with 51 senior leaders surveyed in Singapore.

The findings suggest that while Singapore enterprises are among the most active adopters of AI in the region, many remain uncertain about their ability to sustain business value as deployments expand.

High AI usage, but uneven confidence in long-term ROI

Nearly all Singapore respondents (96 per cent) reported some level of AI use, highlighting strong momentum in AI adoption across industries.

Also Read: Travel is back, and it’s more cutthroat than ever

Two-thirds (66 per cent) said their organisations have already seen success using AI, reflecting early gains from automation, analytics and emerging AI-driven decision-making tools.

However, confidence declines when it comes to sustained returns. Only 23 per cent of Singapore leaders rated their organisation as having strong, industry-leading readiness to achieve long-term ROI from AI.

This gap points to a growing disconnect between deploying AI systems and building the operational foundations needed to support them at scale.

Hitachi Vantara’s research found that as AI workloads increase, data infrastructure challenges are shifting from technical concerns to strategic risks. Many organisations are struggling with fragmented data environments, which can weaken governance, visibility and resilience.

Among Singapore respondents, 52 per cent said data complexity makes it more difficult to detect a security breach, reinforcing the link between infrastructure sprawl and cyber risk.

In addition, 64 per cent agreed that if leadership fully understood how fragile their data infrastructure is, it would “keep them up at night,” highlighting a potential gap between technical experts and executive decision-makers.

The findings suggest that AI adoption alone does not resolve underlying data management weaknesses and may expose them further as systems become more interconnected and mission-critical.

Singapore enterprises taking a more risk-aware approach

Despite these challenges, Hitachi Vantara noted that Singapore firms are demonstrating a more disciplined approach to AI adoption compared with earlier phases of experimentation.

Also Read: Low liquidity, high stakes: Why this crypto pullback feels different

As AI becomes embedded in business operations, enterprises are placing greater emphasis on governance, security and reliability, particularly as AI tools begin to influence high-stakes decisions.

“AI success is no longer about experimentation alone. It depends on whether data environments are resilient, governed and trusted,” said Joe Ong, vice president and general manager for ASEAN at Hitachi Vantara.

“Singapore businesses are clearly ahead in adoption, but the next phase will be defined by how well they manage complexity, security and performance as AI scales,” he added.

The report concludes that while AI adoption in Singapore is widespread and early success is common, rising data complexity and security risks could undermine confidence and returns if left unaddressed.

As AI investment accelerates, organisations will need to simplify data environments, strengthen governance frameworks and improve infrastructure visibility to move from early wins to sustained value creation.

The ability to build trusted and resilient data foundations may ultimately determine which enterprises can fully capitalise on AI adoption in the years ahead.

—

The lead image in this article was generated by AI.

The post Singapore’s AI adoption surges, but data complexity raises security risks: Report appeared first on e27.

Singapore’s rapid AI adoption is no longer a question of ambition. It is now a reality shaping enterprise strategy across industries. Nearly every business leader surveyed in Hitachi Vantara’s latest State of Data Infrastructure 2025 Report reported some level of AI use, signalling that AI has moved firmly beyond experimentation.

But the report also delivers a clear warning: while adoption is widespread, long-term value is far less certain. As Singapore enterprises accelerate AI deployment, growing data complexity and cybersecurity risks are emerging as the next defining challenges.

Over the past two years, many organisations have embraced AI through pilots and early-stage deployments. Quick wins have come from automating routine processes, improving analytics, and supporting decision-making with machine learning tools. Hitachi Vantara’s research shows that 66 per cent of Singapore respondents say their organisation has already been successful using AI. However, confidence drops sharply when it comes to sustained returns. Only 23 per cent believe their organisation has industry-leading readiness to achieve long-term ROI from AI.

This gap highlights a critical turning point: AI adoption is no longer about whether companies can deploy AI tools, but whether they can support them at scale over time. The next phase of adoption will be defined not by innovation alone, but by operational resilience.

Data complexity becomes a strategic constraint

AI systems are only as effective as the data they rely on. As enterprises expand AI workloads, many are discovering that their data environments are fragmented across cloud services, legacy systems, and siloed business units.

Also Read: Singapore’s AI adoption surges, but data complexity raises security risks: Report

What once appeared as a technical issue is now becoming a strategic risk.

More than half of Singapore respondents (52 per cent) said data complexity makes it more difficult to detect a security breach. This finding underscores how sprawling infrastructure reduces visibility and increases vulnerability.

Instead of accelerating progress, unmanaged complexity can slow AI adoption by forcing organisations to spend more time cleaning data, integrating systems, and strengthening governance frameworks before AI can deliver meaningful outcomes.

In practice, the ability to simplify and modernise data infrastructure may become the true differentiator between enterprises that scale AI successfully and those that stall after early pilots.

AI adoption is also expanding the enterprise attack surface. As AI tools connect to sensitive datasets, internal applications, and privileged workflows, weak infrastructure can introduce new pathways for cyber threats.

The report found that 64 per cent of Singapore leaders agree that if executives fully understood how fragile their data infrastructure is, it would “keep them up at night.” This reflects a growing awareness that AI is not only an innovation driver but also a source of operational risk.

Moving forward, enterprises are likely to adopt a more security-first approach. AI investment decisions will increasingly depend on questions of trust, compliance, governance, and resilience — not just capability.

Organisations may demand stronger controls around credentials, access management, model usage, and vendor accountability. AI adoption will continue, but with higher expectations for security maturity.

Also Read: Low liquidity, high stakes: Why this crypto pullback feels different

ROI expectations will reset

The next chapter of AI adoption will also require a shift in mindset. Early success often comes from quick automation wins, but sustained ROI depends on discipline: monitoring, performance optimisation, governance, and cost control.

As AI becomes embedded in mission-critical operations, enterprises will become more selective, prioritising use cases with measurable business impact rather than broad experimentation.

The organisations that succeed will be those that treat AI as a long-term capability supported by strong infrastructure, not a standalone technology layer.

Singapore’s enterprises are already demonstrating a more risk-aware approach compared with earlier phases of AI expansion. Governance, reliability, and trust are becoming central themes, particularly as AI systems influence high-stakes business decisions.

This positions Singapore to set the tone for mature AI adoption across APAC, one that balances speed with security and innovation with resilience.

Ultimately, AI adoption will not slow down. But it is entering a more demanding phase, where success depends less on deploying models and more on building trusted, scalable foundations.

The companies that close the gap between adoption and readiness will define the next wave of AI-driven growth in the region.

—

The lead image of this article was generated by AI.

The post Opinion: AI adoption is the easy part. Scaling it safely is the real challenge. appeared first on e27.

Kopi Kenangan, the Indonesia-founded coffee chain, reported its first full year of profitability for fiscal 2025 while continuing rapid international expansion and tightening governance in preparation for an eventual public listing.

CEO Edward Tirtanata claimed in a LinkedIn post that net revenue for FY2025 reached US$184 million, a 45 per cent increase year-on-year. Net profit was US$17 million, and EBITDA climbed to US$37 million.

Sequoia Capital-backed Kopi Kenangan ended the year with 1,324 stores across six countries and added 347 net-new outlets during the year. The chain’s digital ecosystem brought in 4.47 million new customers in 2025, and the firm reported a same-store sales growth (SSSG) of 15 per cent for the year.

Also Read: From a single brew to unicorn: Kopi Kenangan’s journey of coffee and creativity

The firm employs more than 8,000 people and plans roughly 550 new store openings in 2026.

A shift from growth-at-all-costs

The CEO framed the results as a shift from early-stage expansion toward disciplined, sustainable scaling. He described the company’s focus moving to fundamentals (revenue, profitability and capital allocation) and said the business is building processes and controls typical of companies preparing for an IPO.

Kopi Kenangan highlighted that it has maintained unqualified audit opinions from Big Four auditors over eight financial years and is accelerating its financial close and reporting cadence. The company is also investing in internal controls, tax and legal compliance, and data analytics to strengthen governance and due diligence readiness.

Performance across markets

In its largest market, Indonesia, Kopi Kenangan reported 40 per cent year-on-year revenue growth driven by solid same-store sales. In Malaysia, the company said revenue nearly doubled and that the business delivered positive EBITDA as unit economics improved with scale.

Kopi Kenangan also reported expansion into markets beyond Southeast Asia, naming India and Australia among its newer markets.

Technology and unit economics

The management attributed the fiscal-year performance to “technology-led customer acquisition,” pointing to the 4.47 million new customers acquired through its digital channels. It emphasised that increased scale improved unit economics — a point it presented as evidence that its model can be profitable rather than reliant on market-funded subsidies.

The firm’s stated goal is to “compound responsibly through cycles” rather than pursue top-line growth without regard for margins.

Context in Southeast Asia’s startup cycle

Tirtanata placed Kopi Kenangan’s results in the broader context of a regional reset. After a funding cycle driven by low interest rates, investor sentiment shifted, and many startups reoriented toward profitability.

He argued that the reset, while painful, was healthy for the region and that Southeast Asia still offers structural opportunities — demographic growth and economic expansion — for companies that prioritise unit economics and execution.

Outlook

Kopi Kenangan plans an aggressive rollout in 2026 (about 550 store openings globally) alongside continued efforts to tighten governance, speed up financial reporting and prepare documentation for potential public markets. The company presents its recent profitability and improved EBITDA as markers that it is transitioning from a rapid-growth startup to a more mature, investment-grade consumer business.

Also Read: Brewing success: A comparative analysis of Kopi Kenangan and Kopi Janji Jiwa coffee chains in Indonesia

By focusing on unit economics and “compounding responsibly,” Kopi Kenangan is positioning itself to be a resilient, long-term player in the global coffee market rather than a subsidised startup.

In 2026, one can expect the company to prioritise operational maturity alongside its aggressive physical expansion.

The post Kopi Kenangan posts first profitable year as it expands to 1,324 stores across six countries appeared first on e27.

Off the coast of Ireland, beneath the Atlantic Ocean, lies a vast nervous system of cables. These strands of fibre-optic wiring form the invisible infrastructure of our globalised world. These aren’t just conduits for internet traffic; they’re arteries of modern civilisation, carrying everything from financial transactions to state secrets.

And now, they’re under siege. This seabed has been making headlines as it is not just an ocean that connects us but underwater cables that ar the lifeline of our virtual connections. In todays world we are seeing daily threats to the very infrastructure that allows us the freedom to connect, explore and trade with the rest of the world.

The hyper-sensitivity to globalisation has inserted fear where there was opportunity. Instead of viewing these connections as extremely valuable points of cultural intersections we are seeing them as threats to the viability of local industries. 

It is not just the fibre-optic wiring stretching thousands of miles across the seabed that is threatened, but rather the ability to operate, trade and communicate globally. Stability in geopolitics is crucial for doing business in all shapes and forms today. 

As recent global tensions rise, cybersecurity threats multiply, and there is an increasing risk of disruption. 

The new frontline is digital

The world is teetering on the edge of a new era, one where firewalls matter more than fences, and zero-day exploits can be as devastating as missile strikes. “I look at the current political landscape and see a world under strain,” says Rhythm Jain, a Marketing Development Manager at Resonance Security.

This battleground is vast and largely invisible, stretching from the inboxes of public officials to the seabeds off Ireland’s coast. In 2024, NATO released a bold new strategy to secure undersea infrastructure, citing increased Russian submarine activity near British waters. The message is clear: cables are now targets, and data is a strategic asset.

The cables are just one piece. From the 2020 SolarWinds breach to daily ransomware attacks on hospitals and water systems, it’s clear that the digital realm is now where the most consequential battles are fought.

“If you’re building anything that holds value, you’re a target,” says Jain. In a world where physical borders blur and kinetic warfare feels like an artifact of the 20th century, the real battles are happening in code. The firewalls of corporations and nations alike are now the new frontlines, and the stakes have never been higher.

“Geopolitical rivalries, economic uncertainty, and fractured alliances are fuelling a surge in cyber threats. Tensions between major powers like the US, China, and Russia, alongside regional flashpoints like Iran or North Korea, have turned cyberspace into a battleground.”

The past decade has seen an explosion in digital espionage, ransomware, and infrastructure sabotage. From hospitals being locked down by ransomware during a pandemic to energy pipelines halted by keystrokes, it’s clear, cybersecurity is now a necessity.

Also Read: AI power shift: How geopolitics and innovation are rewriting global rules

Vital infrastructure is exposed and vulnerable

Modern critical infrastructure including power grids, healthcare networks, financial systems were never designed with state-sponsored hackers in mind. “I believe ransomware attacks on critical infrastructure are a growing threat, often fueled by geopolitical tensions,” says Jain. “They exploit weak identity and access controls, letting hackers lock up vital systems.”

The situation demands a radical rethink. Blockchain-based decentralised identity (DID) systems are being explored as a solution, offering cryptographic verification instead of passwords and making impersonation significantly harder.

“Blockchain’s strength is its decentralised, tamper-proof ledger,” says Jain. “Imagine a power plant where every technician’s access is verified on a blockchain; hackers couldn’t easily impersonate someone to gain entry.”

Early implementations are promising, with companies experimenting with blockchain to verify machine identities and reduce unauthorised access to vital infrastructure. But this tech isn’t 100 per cent secure.

“Blockchain doesn’t stop phishing or social engineering. It’s also resource-heavy. And if private keys are mismanaged, then the whole system becomes vulnerable.”

In other words, there is no silver bullet but there is a smarter way forward. And it starts with layered, adaptive defenses built on a deep understanding of threat evolution.

Regulation is a hot topic

As cyber threats escalate, so too does the conversation around regulation. But not all regulation is created equal.

“Regulations create a baseline,” says Jain. “They force companies and institutions to adopt minimum standards: multi-factor authentication, encryption, incident response plans. Without that push, many organisations wouldn’t prioritise security until it’s too late.”

However, regulation can backfire when reduced to checklists and certifications. “Compliance is not security,” he warns. “I’ve seen companies with all the right certifications still fall victim to ransomware because no one was monitoring their logs.”

The solution? Thoughtful oversight that prioritises real-world resilience over audit-readiness. “The goal of regulation should be to raise the floor, not define the ceiling. It should encourage companies to build a real security culture and not just tick boxes once a year.”

Also Read: Asia’s trade turning point: How tariffs and geopolitics are redrawing supply chains

Security experts are a voice of reason in the storm

This fragmentation of global digital infrastructure has global implications. If countries begin developing separate, competing networks, the internet as we know it could become increasingly divided, where national security priorities override the free flow of information. 

For businesses, this could mean increased costs and inefficiencies as they navigate multiple regulatory and security frameworks. For individuals, it could mean a future where access to information is dictated by geopolitics rather than technological progress. 

Addressing these risks requires a multi-pronged approach. First, international cooperation must be strengthened to safeguard all infrastructure. The US and its allies are also working on developing quantum encryption technologies to prevent cyber intrusions on data transmitted through undersea cables. Secondly, offering public and private partnerships where security experts can provide case studies, evidence, and education with regards to vulnerable areas of work.

Welcome to the era of cyber geopolitics where the interconnected world is adding layers of new security challenges. By safeguarding the infrastructures that unite us and thoughtfully navigating the currents of globalisation, we can transform challenges into avenues for cooperation and mutual growth. How nations respond in the coming years will determine whether the internet remains a tool for progress or a source of conflict.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Join us on Instagram, Facebook, X, LinkedIn, and our WA community to stay connected.

Image courtesy: Canva Pro

The post Code, power, and chaos: The geopolitics of cybersecurity appeared first on e27.