Point-of-use Soil Diagnostics: An Actionable Information System for Resource Constrained Farmers by Soumya Braganza B.E. Electronics and Communications Engineering Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, 2010 SUBMITTED TO THE INSTITUTE FOR DATA, SYSTEMS, AND SOCIETY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN TECHNOLOGY AND POLICY AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JUNE 2016 ©2016 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All rights reserved. Signature of Author: __________________________________________________________________ Institute for Data, Systems, and Society May 12, 2016 Certified by: _________________________________________________________________________ Chintan Vaishnav Senior Lecturer, MIT Sloan School of Management Thesis Supervisor Accepted by:_________________________________________________________________________ Munther Dahleh William A. Coolidge Professor, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Director, Institute for Data, Systems, and Society Acting Director, Technology and Policy Program 1 2 Point-of-use Soil Diagnostics: An Actionable Information System for Resource Constrained Farmers by Soumya Braganza Submitted to the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society on May 12th 2016, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Technology and Policy Abstract During the mid-1960s, India came to the brink of an acute food crisis in the midst of heavy dependence on food imports. A period of rapid agricultural modernization that followed, known as Green Revolution, transformed India from a net importer of food into an exporter. Although an appropriate response for abating the impending starvation, the Green Revolution inflicted several unintended consequences. For example, regulatory structure and fertilizer subsidies for urea that were designed to stimulate growth instead resulted in a lock-in, which in turn incentivized vast over-fertilization across the country. Today, this is a well-recognized problem, and the Government of India has announced policies and schemes such as the National Soil Health Card Scheme to increase knowledge of soil condition and curb fertilizer use. In reality, however, the current need for information on soil health far exceeds the capacity for soil testing, highlighting the need for a radical approach to meeting this policy objective. This project, undertaken in collaboration with MIT Mechanical Engineering, takes a two-part approach to addressing this problem, with the design of a point-of-use soil testing sensor and an accompanying recommendation generation engine. This thesis presents the design of the latter based upon the answer to the following question: what constitutes an actionable information for resource constrained farmers? To answer it, we use a mixed methodology approach comprising (i) a combination of stakeholder interviews and design workshops to elicit user needs, and (ii) controlled experimentation with over 200 farmers covering an entire village to measure the actionability of information in soil health recommendations. The results of the analysis of experimental data reveal that the actionability of recommendations varies significantly within the population of farmers tested, and can be attributed to the level of information provided, the environment in which a farmer receives a recommendation, gender, and education level. Consequently, an effective point-of-use diagnostic system must adjust for these factors in order to maintain high actionability. To that end, we then use the experimental results to design a recommendation generation engine, the core of which is a soil health database that maximizes the actionability of information for a resource constrained farmer. Thesis Supervisor: Chintan Vaishnav Title: Senior Lecturer 3 Acknowledgements First and foremost, I want to thank my thesis supervisor, Chintan Vaishnav, for his support and guidance through this project. He consistently allowed this work to be my own, but steered me in the right direction whenever he thought I needed it. I admire Chintan for his dedication to this project and the passion with which he strives to bring the fruits of research at MIT to the underprivileged in India. I am immensely grateful to the MIT Tata Center for Technology and Design for making this project possible, and for providing me with a wealth of resources, support, and guidance over the last two years. The opportunity to directly interact with the individuals whom my research is meant to serve is a truly unique experience that only the Tata Center could have provided. I am proud to call myself a Tata Fellow. A very special thank you to Ron Rosenberg, my research buddy and travel companion. Field trips to India would not have been as much fun without you! Thank you also to Leah Slaten, the amazing UROP who contributed to this project. This work would not have been possible without the support of The Deshpande Foundation, The Himmothan Society, IARI, and numerous others who supported us in our trips to India. A special thank you to Naveen, Manjunatha, Innus, and Kusuma at the Deshpande Foundation, and Malavika at the Himmothan Society, all of whom cheerfully devoted numerous hours towards making our field work a success. To the TPP administration, thank you for always being supportive and accommodating throughout my time at MIT. I feel so lucky to have been a part of TPP, surrounded by some of the smartest and most interesting people I know. Finally, I must express my very profound gratitude to my family, and especially to my husband Siddharth, for providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout my time at MIT and through the process of researching and writing this thesis. This accomplishment would not have been possible without you. 4 Contents 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 8 2. Methodology Overview & Research Question ............................................................................. 12 2.1 Research Question.......................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Methodology Overview ................................................................................................................ 12 2.2.1 Field Research .......................................................................................................................... 12 2.2.2 Policy Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 13 2.2.3 Actionability Experiment ....................................................................................................... 13 2.2.4 Database Design ...................................................................................................................... 13 3. Problem Finding .................................................................................................................................. 14 3.1 Review of Literature ...................................................................................................................... 14 3.2 Gap Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 17 3.2.1 Policy Gap ................................................................................................................................ 18 3.2.2 User Needs Gap ....................................................................................................................... 22 3.2.2.1 Stakeholder Interviews .................................................................................................... 22 3.2.2.2 Interactive Workshops .................................................................................................... 30 3.2.2.3 Product Contract .............................................................................................................. 43 3.3 Discussion of Research Question ................................................................................................. 44 4. Actionability Experiment: Data and Analysis ............................................................................... 45 4.1 Motivation ....................................................................................................................................... 45 4.2 Experimental Design ..................................................................................................................... 45 4.3 Examination of Data ...................................................................................................................... 49 4.4 Components of Actionability ....................................................................................................... 52 4.5 Analysis of factors affecting components of Actionability ...................................................... 53 4.5.1 Model 1: ‘Interpret’ ................................................................................................................. 53 4.5.2 Model 2: ‘Ease’ ......................................................................................................................... 55 4.5.3 Model 3: ‘Acquire’ ................................................................................................................... 56 4.5.4 Model 4: ‘Afford’