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.