IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - September 2020 - 88

solely providing their goods to the farmer, the farmer
can send back data that will then adjust the input supply
to the more real-time needsof the farm, improving its
site-specific management [10]. In agriculture, as is in
many other industries, there is a lack of oversight and
recommendations into how to incorporate big data into
agriculture's current operations. From data collection,
storage, and dissemination there are many aspects of
the big data process to which attention should be paid.
There are many issues with big data in agriculture such
as data ownership, dissimination, privacy, ethics, and
security [1], [9], [11]-[14]. Big data in agriculture does
not always get the consideration it deserves, but it is
currently changing the way farms are operated and
managed [15]. The different aspects of big data in agriculture will be discussed in the sections below.

Data Collection
For agriculture, the most powerful stakeholders are not
the growers, but the agricultural technology providers
(ATP). For years providers have been upgrading the equipment sold to growers with sensors that passively collect
information and send it back to the ATP, often without the
knowledge or informed consent of the grower [16]. The
data collected is then used to create new software for
precision agriculture and then resold to the grower.
The top concern for farmers is how their data is used
and collected [17], [18]. There is also a concern if the
ATPs will use the information collected to price discriminate against the grower [19]. However, the software in
question could not exist without the data collected from
the grower.
Growers used to be the proprietors of their own land
and resources. But because of the loss of control over
data collection and its use, the growers have begun to
feel powerless in the industry in which they used to control of their land and resources. Because of this and a
growing mistrust of ATPs, growers would rather work
with local customized service provers who do make the
effort to clearly state who owns the data and the products [12], [20]. Smaller start-ups such as FarmLogs and
FarmLink have popped up to challenge the large ATPs
and are making some headway [15]. Also, these smaller
and local organizations are more likely to include the
know-how and expertise of the farmer in their analyses
and product development, while ATPs tend to just use
the remote sensing data. It is a worthwhile question to
consider, what information is lost when we keep the
growers out of the loop of the development of the PA
algorithms [8]. For example, smaller farms use different
methods such as no-till, intercropping, and drip-irrigation which produces higher yields than megafarms, but
this knowledge is not collected through PA techniques
which focuses on large farms [16].

Collecting agriculture data is not a new concept to
growers; in fact, many growers have been collecting
various types of information about their own farms for
decades. From weather and soil conditions, to what disease or pest was mitigated that season, to where their
seeds were purchased, has all been on the books for
growers' own personal use [19]. What has changed is
who has access to this data now and whether that data
was accessed with permission of the grower. There is
now a pushback from growers and other activists who
want to bring more autonomy back to the growers.
Grassroots and advocacy organizations have popped
up to teach growers how to analyze the data they
already have [15]. Other growers are learning how to fix
the computerized equipment sold to them by ATPs,
which they then turn around and teach other growers
[21]. There is a renewed interest in agriculture from laypeople as well. There are emerging urban gardens,
rooftop gardens, and co-ops where people seek to
reconnect with the origin of their food. The idea of who
can be a grower or farmer is changing, and the tools
that are used in the industry need to address this.

Data Ownership and Dissemination
Data ownership and dissemination is an issue of concern for growers who must read and sign user agreements with ATPs, who decide how and when they take
data from the growers. The terms of data privacy are not
written clearly for the user, the farmer. For example, 55%
of growers have acknowledged they signed contracts with
ATPs that did not explain data ownership [17]. ATPs take
advantage of the fact that growers do not read the service agreements and write in waivers to data ownership
rights [22]. The growers are left in the dark about how
their data is stored, traded, and analyzed by ATPs [16].
Farmers are generally skeptical of the ATPs and hold
concern that the ATPs will use their data to create value
beyond their farms without giving the farmers compensation and also create a barrier of entry into the industry as newer organizations will not have access to the
treasure trove of data the current ATPs have accumulated [18], [19], [23]. ATPs have no obligation or incentive
to make their data available even to the farmers from
whom they took the data [16]. Farmers need the ability
to protect their data and to bargain with ATPs for their
valuable contributions [24]. Regulations to address this
will be discussed later in this article.

Privacy
There is no guarantee that the data collected by the
ATPs will remain private. The D.C. Circuit Court had
ruled that privacy rules that protect sensitive personal
information do not apply to the data the ATPs collect
[19]. There is no federal legislation equivalent of a

IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE

∕

SEPTEMBER 2020

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - September 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - September 2020