Through The Storm
While I am well aware of the agile methodology, it is only through Frontier Technology Livestreaming that I have worked in sprints and I can appreciate the benefits of operating with such a framework. It has enabled us set clear and well-defined objectives, bringing a lot more focus and reducing distractions through the various problems we are trying to solve. I think it is a highly efficient tool, especially for startups who don’t have a lot of time and resources, pretty much all the time.
Lessons from Sprint 1:
● Don’t plan too much. Set realistic targets based on the capacity you have rather than everything you would like to do.
● Fail fast and move on or pivot without considering “failure” as failure, rather view it as more data and knowledge.
● Recognize your limits and put a pin in an experiment if the required focus and attention to complete it cannot be achieved, especially if other experiments will suffer due to this.
The first Sprint was quite stressful for everyone with a lot of pressure (self-inflicted) but more importantly a lot of targets and experiments set. We learnt a lot from that experience and decided to focus on technical and economic issues for the upcoming sprint and postpone one of the outstanding experiments to a future sprint.
Based on lessons learnt from Sprint 1 as well as more questions that came to the surface, we set the following experiments based on these assumptions:
● Assumption 1: We believe that herdsmen have an understanding of their general spending patterns and needs.
● Assumption 2: We believe we can make hydroponic fodder systems with attainable setup costs for different end users, while maintaining general efficiency (overall growth levels).
● Assumption 3: We believe we can make hydroponic fodder systems out of materials that are attainable for different end users while maintaining general efficiency.
SPRINT 2
EXPERIMENT 1
This assumption was something I was quite worried about, I generally wasn’t too sure how much herders focus on book/record keeping, which is a general issue with rural and small holder farmers. Not necessarily because they don’t have the literacy level (and a lot of them have basic knowledge on math, or someone amongst them does) but they fail to see the benefits of keeping track of expenses vs revenue. This may be due to the fact that they live hand to mouth, so they lack the ability to accrue savings even though there are benefits to record keeping as it can serve as a baseline to future loans and credit lines from microfinance banks or other financial institutions.
In lieu of the above, my concerns were justified, and I was even more concerned in terms of what this means for the development of a business model that will make the future of the project and technology sustainable.
In an effort to get this information we decided to speak to one of the stakeholders we had previously engaged with, GIZ. Their PEACECORE project in Plateau State is mandated to work on herder farmer conflict and mediation, a project which has been running for about 3 years. They have project managers who themselves grew up around similar environments and were willing to have conversations to educate us and give us a better understanding on the herder’s rearing practices.
The call was extremely informative. I utilized a questionnaire to get a better understanding of the entire life cycle of a cow being reared in a herder community as well as the activities involved in the process. For example, we were able to attain that cattle aren’t just simply bought but are considered heirlooms, they are passed down through generations.
What became inherently clear is that these herder communities do indeed spend financial resources in rearing their cattle and are also able to generate a profit, however, the exact profit is difficult to ascertain. 50% of the spendings go into the fattening cycle, which commences 2–3 months before the intended sale. The other 50% is spent during the 2–3 year growth cycle, which is a period they commonly spend roaming for pasture. We were also informed that the communities are interested in cultivating their own fodder, indicating that they are seeking alternative solutions to roaming for pasture.
While we don’t have all the answers yet, the data received so far will allow us to develop a potential business model which can be fleshed out in future sprints in partnership with other stakeholders.
EXPERIMENT 2 & 3
The biggest obstacle will always be the initial financial cost required to setup a hydroponic fodder system. In the previous sprint we created two systems: one that speaks to commercial ranches and comes with a higher setup cost, and secondly, one which has a lower setup cost, applicable to herder communities with limited resources. While the latter has a lower price tag, further reductions will make this system and a business model more attainable for the target demographic of community herders and allow greater scale of impact. Simplifying the technology often helps in reducing overall cost and to do this we had to reassess the system again.
After the first sprint and a short break my water technician and I were at site reviewing the whole system. We were able to propose changes that made day to day management easier, but also reduced installation time and the cost of the watering system.
During the previous sprint I had already begun questioning the need for the roof, or at the very least the type of roofing material we used. I drew inspiration from make-shift covers utilizing straw to cover beach houses but also homes in rural communities. While the idea was great, after research and speaking to vendors it became clear this isn’t something just anyone can install and isn’t as cheap as one may think, so I had to think of something else.
Culturally everywhere in the country “woven floor mats” are used in every household, especially rural households. They serve as gathering points on the floor, people sit on them to eat, to sleep or to sit outside. They are “cheap” (this is subjective) and available everywhere as a common household item. Back in the 90’s I still recall how they were woven by hand with straw.
However, in the 2000’s most of these were replaced with the factory manufactured plastic version which is more durable. I am not sure how much the traditional ones are still made; however, I do hope and believe they have more of a presence in rural areas where families can make them by hand for their own use and sale.
These could be a great replacement for traditional roof material, they will provide enough shade from the sun to prevent the water around the plants evaporate too quickly, but on rainy days it may eliminate or reduce the need for irrigation by allowing rain trickle through in moderation.
At the same time, it is comparably cheaper to aluminum (also more environmentally friendly when using the straw type) and the mats are accessible in most rural settings.
We installed the straw mats and thankfully we are currently at the early stages of the raining season in Nigeria, so I am anxiously awaiting the next rain to be able to see how much rain really flows through. Rains came, however only at night. One morning I could see a storm brewing and I got ready to make my way to the facility which is only 20 meters away from the house. The storm came with significant winds, and I almost turned back but curiosity killed the cat and I really wanted to see how the roof worked. I finally made it and while the video is only a few seconds long, it does show rainwater running through the mat roof and it was very satisfying to witness!
What also really surprised me is that the storm ended up damaging the roof of some surrounding buildings, but ours was unscathed. I presume this is due to the fact that air is able to pass through the roof, therefore reducing the pressure that would ordinarily create damage.
We also replaced the previously installed cumbersome and costly water supply system with something a lot more simple, less expensive and much more effective. We were able to achieve the same with the drainage system. Both plumbing systems now require less material and therefore have reduced installation time significantly.
Our overall target of reducing cost of the system and utilizing materials more attainable in rural settings was met beyond what I could have expected.
The next steps would be engaging the private sector to discuss a potential out-grower model that is commonly applied in crop production. This model is often applied in developing countries where access to financing is difficult for farmers.
In the case of financial institutions, they provide financing prior to the planting season to enable the buying of seeds, fertilizer etc. After the sale of harvest, the loan is then repaid to the bank plus interest.
However, when companies take on this model, they often provide the actual inputs such as seeds and fertilizer to farmers, rather than funds and then proceed to buy the harvest from the farmers at a discounted rate to accommodate the initial inputs provided.
Because these types of models are commonly used with the informal part of the sector, there aren’t many ways to mitigate the risk due to the limited assets these farmers have, making a pre-existing relationship crucial to such an arrangement.
Many times, this model fails due to the lack of stakeholder engagement at planning stage, but it is still the most viable option to allow smallholder farmers scale their production, with many private companies utilizing this model in Nigeria in collaboration with smallholder farmers.
I believe in the future a similar model may be applied in combination with our system and the private sector that would provide these herder communities what they need without being required to make available all financial resources for setup.
Some of these questions and more will hopefully be answered in our next sprint, so please stay tuned.
