Microfinance and technological innovations in Agri
startups.
Dinesh K Kapila
(Largely what was part of the address at MANAGE – 09/09/2023)
Our object in the construction of the State is
the greatest happiness of the whole, and not that of any one class. So said
Plato centuries ago. And hence, the philosophical underpinnings of
developmental initiatives including microfinance. And hence, the thought of
reaching... Out to all segments of society for hassle free credit. This is a
bit of a complex issue as there is so much happening in this sector already. We have to calibrate our thoughts to study
the opportunities or areas which can be tapped for a closer association or the
mode to do so.
While in service, I would often say, or maybe
feel, that while we review a large amount of data at the various fora as
regards lending by banks, cooperatives, commercial, RRBs, small finance banks - but
there is a gap. The data of MFIs or NBFCs. That is the gap. They have a
considerable stake in the game now, especially on the lending side. If I
remember my data... If Haryana had rupees hundred odd crore disbursed by banks under
the SHG Bank Linkage Program, the outstanding of MFIs was about rupees eleven
hundred crore. And a similar situation, if I remember, was there in Punjab too.
This was so advised by the then Northern Region Vice President of the concerned
Association. So we should start with the realization of this fact and then
twenty plus years ago, as regard SRTOs, I remember the market was essentially
captured by the NBFCs rather than by the banks.
But then if we take up microfinance and we are
looking at say the agriculture sector exclusively, it could be lending such as extending
credit to beekeepers. It could be lending to small entrepreneurs engaged in
small services for agriculture. So we have to look at it from that point of
view, the activity, its scale, its potential, the demand and viability. And
staying with this thought, in Himachal Pradesh, I would notice that the gap
exists in holdings versus PM Kisan beneficiaries and KCCs issued. This gap is
there. It's sort of consistently constant. Land holdings are small and say, a
segment of the farmers who are owners of small land holdings – holdings are
measured in bighas there - would get access to just about Rs. 25, 000 to Rs.
50, 000 as per the scale of finance as bank credit for crop loans. This is
considered an insufficient or not worthy of the effort to obtain funding
through the KCCs by some farmers and then some Bankers in the field at times also
view it from this prism.
Can microfinance leverage technology to reach
out to these scattered holdings at an affordable cost? The same status, sort
of, prevails in Kashmir and other hill states. This is food for thought for us.
What about vegetable farmers or small farmers in Punjab leasing in small parcels
of land for an additional income, but unable to raise the required funding?
Can microfinance consider potential here? Is
there a potential? Technology plus agreements with banks (as their extension) plus
extension for technological inputs plus at an affordable cost could be a pathway.
These are the thoughts I would like to share. After all, we are identifying the
gaps and then how to bridge them here. We can stay on the traditional modes or regions
or segments or can start exploring more such areas. Just to add, tenant and
marginal farmers are another vital segment to tap, along with extension if
possible, but the pricing of the credit is also very important.
Now, another thought, agriculture expansion by
itself is not enough to conquer poverty. So let us think, agriculture plus rural
non farm sector would be the runway with Agritech cum Fintech as the
productivity enhancer. Privately held and competitive agriculture and a vibrant
agribusiness are both to fire in tandem for economic progress. Family farms and
non farm enterprises provide ample remunerative opportunities and employment
opportunities for men and women both. I would say for microfinance, this is an
ideal opportunity. For both the segments, treating them as a whole and tapping
the segment, which would not only be targeting the just at the bottom only,
maybe a scale above that, and facilitate their upward mobility. Technology, has
to be logically integrated into this approach and platform.
When we say microcredit or microfinance, I
trust all know the definition, purpose, intent
and the regulations and a good reading of the SHG concept and the JLG concept
would be in order. It's necessary to understand the evolution and the mode and
then the emergence of MFIs. Any practitioner, and especially a young entrant,
must absorb intrinsically the thought and the process which led to the
institutionalization of MFIs, as also the SIG Bank Linkage Program.
We tend to get focused on targets and get
locked into the process. But we must know the background, the history, and how
it has led up to this point. Microfinance is people first. Always. Even the
technology one has to innerstand, I would say, not understand, but innerstand
this. It's people first, who are off the socio economic charts largely, being
grouped together for access to hassle free credit. And do not equate it with
poverty elevation per se. But access to credit first and the inculcation of the
habit of savings. Absorb this spirit and understand empowerment along with dignity
in lending and recovery, this is very important. You must take delight in the process
of empowerment, it motivates and encourages. When I would meet SHG members in a
patriarchal setting and observe their success and delight, the self confidence
itself was a revelation. The same goes for young artisans engaged in varied
trades.
Now we can explore agripreneurship through
microfinance and technology and startups for socioeconomic development. We have
climate change, reduced quality of water, nutrient deficiency, carbon
deficiency, farm energy requirements, lack of biodiversity, fragmenting holdings,
changing trade dynamics, et cetera. These are quite well known to us.
Agri startups with their targeted resources
and services can achieve commercial success in a win win situation aligned with
the MFIs. Add extension and handholding to financial options exercised by the
MFIs. And it can lead to higher productivity and higher income. Skilled
manpower of the MFIs, along with the skilled manpower of agri startups, and the
power of technology, accessed through digitization, can they address the
missing links in the agri value chain? This
is one area which we have to carefully consider. For products, technology, and
services to agripreneurs, farmers, and consumers. The area of service, for example,
commercial accounting systems through service providers in rural areas and even
in semi urban areas remains a gap. Can we tap that with microfinance and its
reach, which extends to a lot of such places and regions?
Then incubation centers and entrepreneurship
programs, be it, drones, beekeeping, polyhouses, equipment for precision
farming, growing high value vegetables and the like. At times, in my view mostly, the
requirements for credit may be small to start with of the ideation equipped entrepreneurs,
this is one sector. The would be entrepreneurs at the incubation centers or the
would be entrepreneurs need capital to build up and experiment and then scale
up through other sources. This would be in tandem with other agencies and
funders but seems an area to explore.
Could there be a microfinance opportunity
here? Could the incubation centers be tapped accordingly? Explored at least.
And more important, there are many Centers of Excellence opened up by various State
Governments in many states and even the GOI. I know at least this is there n
Haryana, Punjab, and some other states. Can the trainees at such centers be
interacted with for opportunities for microfinance plus agri tech? This can be
thought of. The requirements per head could be on the lower side but they could
be grouped up too.
FPOs are another opportunity for an entry
point. For supplementing credit needs, if any, as the FPO scales up and members
may need credit, access to E markets. and the NCDEX, etc. Can startups,
incubation centers, accelerators, microfinance companies all join up and align
their goals with the government and its agencies for the areas or sectors as
above or for facilitating access to technology for smarter and more scientific
farming and rural enterprises. This could be in Climate Change, insurance per
se in the broader sense, cleantech and storage, logistics, cold chains.
Higher productivity is the objective. So these
are some areas which can be thought of as we go along. There is a serious line
of thought which says that though the adoption of agrotech is a little limited
as of now, this will only increase and maybe cover 50 percent of farmers By
2030 or 2035. Such farmers and rural enterprises would be comfortable with agrotech or farmtech
or low cost tech solutions and therefore the costing, adoption, digitisation and access to curated
content and personalized solutions may need to evolve, can micro finance align
and coordinate with agri startups along this thought process.
Important, I stress this, we have to remember,
farmers and ruralites need a physical touch, a comfort level even while we
remain focused on technology and its application. Trust has to be built. MFIs
have a presence at the local level. Can a partnership evolve with agri startups
focused around this? I normally advise agri startups that they must have a
physical backup, even if it's satellite based crop insurance. Have a person on
the ground to guide and coordinate. It matters. Messages on smartphone, short
and crisp, created to be just the screen
size or just a scroll down on cropping patterns, weather patterns,
productivity, best practices, success stories, advisories can be coordinated,
readable and in the local language and on a real time basis. This can be the
add on.
And why only micro finance. It has to be micro
insurance and insurance also. It's up to the FPOs and agri startups, as entry
points in the beginning, but this would be a logical pathway, MFIs have the
reach to push this. Insurance or micro insurance, and even I would say, Suraksha
Bima Yojana, JJ Bima Yojna, Atal Pension Yojana. need to be inculcated in the
rural areas.
Agritech, plus FinTech, plus Rural Tech. There
is a sort of blurring of boundaries per se. Common to all, Before any venture, We
have to conduct extensive pilots across different crop settings, climatic
zones, and harvesting seasons to test them and to build its relevance. Also local
moneylenders. I have blogged on one person called Atma Ram. See how they
function and build linkages. Meet up with agri universities too and large
corporations – they need a route to reach out too and in case of corporates,
even the FMCG companies.
Corporates or Agritech exploring for markets,
care and caution is the key. We know the blowback which happened in the farm
laws case. We have to reach out and calibrate each step and initiative by being
cautious about not raising expectations, which cannot be met. And at the same
time, assuring that productivity parameters would increase due to the pilot
already taken up and its grounding after testing.
The technological possibilities we have
discussed. These are the areas where MFIs and Agritech can combine, provided
the cost of the technology is lowered with innovation to an extent that the
small and marginal farmers can also adopt the same or maybe rent the same. The
cost is important, innovation must centre around the cost aspect, say,
precision farming having sensors which are as effective as in the developed
nations but at a much reduced cost We will remain a price sensitive market.
This is the fact of the matter.
And then it's not all technology,
traceability, carbon credits, precision farming, we need plain simple
interventions. In processes and business models to and if we have to go the
technological way, which we have to, And have the reach even physically to
build a comfort with technology.
Now coming back to the SHG BLP and JLGs and
the banking aspect. The SHG BLP ultimately had one aspect where it faltered at
times, the tri junction of having an NGO plus a bank plus the group, which
caused a coordination issue and then the dependency syndrome was there. The SHG
business is also a small component as compared to the total branch business at
many commercial banks, especially say in Punjab, Haryana. So the incentive to
the branch manager was also not to the extent as envisaged. for lending to SHGs.
It continues and at a consistent pace but the degree of impact varies. Then the
deeply ingrained patriarchy in northwest
India. And these are the areas which became barriers.
A very relevant program taken up across India
was the digitization of SHGs by NABARD. It used technology successfully and
involved a considerable amount of data collection and training. A sidelight and
learning point, I found the smartphones a barrier. If the wife gave the number
of the husband, as not all have smartphones or feature phones, the savings and
transactions were known to the husband. Many a times, the husbands really did
not know when everything was written
only in a register kept with the group leader about the actual transactions,
savings, etc. This loss of privacy could be tough in a patriarchy. Plus again,
the dependency syndrome that in case we withdrew, the movement would die out or
the updating of records would become a problem. The willingness to own the
programme is somewhat a gray area. Then there were also field results, also had
field realities also intervened in terms of updating of data, plus the movement
of animators to the various villages as groups could be scattered and also members,
non updating of data registers, and what was there actually on the mobile being
recorded, and sometimes apathy at banks.
I'm informing this just to bring out that when
MFI step in, these are the areas which have to be taken care of if they start
aligning with agri startups and also bring in the extension element to bring
about technological innovation.
One important aspect for all MFI practitioners
and agri tech practitioners, when you explore areas for innovation and taking
up, you must read up on government programs, budgetary allocations, central and
state schemes. This is a must. This will also indicate the direction of
investments to be undertaken and how to undertake them and whether any
innovation is possible in that sector and also how to dovetail your own efforts
and initiatives with the government programs.
Coming to one more point, lending, payments,
banking, taxation, fintechs are revolutionizing financial inclusion and digital
financial adoption. They have the ability to reach the marginalized markets at
the grassroots level. They have a customer first approach. Now, this part of
the fintech, and the microfinance, and the agritech, if this process can be
integrated, of working closely and aligning the goals closely, and also working
as appropriate with public and private sector banks, it can be a game changer
provided costs are lowered. This could bring about a considerable increase in
credit velocity in rural areas and the non farm sector. Fintechs are
undertaking innovations through the smartphones and QR codes, voice code, voice
modes, etc. But what is required is, again, pricing model has to be such that
It hastens the pace of adoption and the acceptance of the mode of transactions
and the comfort level.
As regards FPOs, the, Fractured supply lines,
optimum capacity utilization, benefits of technology, improving processes in
the field. We need to enhance technology and enhance output by technology. It
reduces in turn the input cost, enhances the profits of farmers. The FPOs
present an opportunity to reach out, provided the FPO itself is working on the
lines as envisaged under the guidelines. Extension by digital tools and
connectivity and the realization that digital technology has injected
transparency has to be brought out across FPOs.
And lower the cost of technology, to
reiterate, the better would be the adaption, adoption and the adapting ability
of the small and marginal farmer. Digital technology can be upstream inputs and
processes, and it can be post harvest and value addition downstream. We have
the PMJDY, the Jan Dhan Yojana, uh, UPI, etc. All these are driving innovation,
but still there is a hesitancy as regards technological adoption, primarily due
to the cost factor. This is one factor which we have to think of.
It’s the cost of credit and the cost of
technology and its adoption? These are two fundamental concerns to sum up. Some
start ups and fintechs backed by investors have experimented with this but at a
small scale. Microfinance can be used for a variety of purposes starting or
expanding a business to buy inputs or to pay for a lease for a small farm
expanding a business repairing houses for health care.
But in case we
can have a fruitful association as envisaged, it can lead to higher
productivity and much higher social economic development in the rural areas.
Which would of course have a greater impact on the nation's economy as
a whole. Thank you.
Dinesh K Kapila, Chief
General Manager (Retd), NABARD.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments
Post a Comment