DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY:

IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES AND

STRATEGIES IN AGRI-FOOD SUPPLY
CHAIN
Priyanka Vern, Naema Miftah and Anupama Panghal

ABSTRACT

The Agri-Food supply chain (AFSC) conventionally suffers from multifaceted trans-
parency, integration, traceability, product quality, and many more. Recently, various
digital technologies have emerged, which reflect the potential to address the majority of
such concerns. This chapter is an effort toward developing a vision for the future of the
agri-food supply chain through digitalization. The technologies prominently covered in
the chapter are the internet of things (IoT), blockchain, and artificial intelligence (AI).
Different challenges the agri-food supply chain participants perceived in implementing
digital technologies were identified through literature review and primary survey. The
significant challenges are trained workforce, funds availability, and clarity on economic
gains from digitalisation. In conclusion, few strategies toward the implementation of
digital technologies in agri-food supply chains are discussed.

Keywords: Digital technology; Internet of things (IoT); blockchain technology;

artificial intelligence (AI); agri-food supply chain; strategies; challenges

1. INTRODUCTION
Agri-food supply chain (AFSC) involves complex operations, jobs, and tasks. The chal-
lenges faced by different stakeholders in the global AFSC are vast, ranging from uncer-
tainty, reduced transparency, reduced traceability, quality-related issues, fewer margins,
lack of integration, inaccurate information, and lack of industrialization (Kamble,
Gunasekaran, & Gawankar, 2020). All these issues have a detrimental influence on quality,
quantity, and safety, resulting in the wastage of human, technological, and natural
resources and products. With time, digital technologies emerge as a solution to supply
chain challenges and supporting various activities of AFSC. Digitally driven supply chains

Agri-Food 4.0
Advanced Series in Management, Volume 27, 17–30
Copyright © 2022 by Emerald Publishing Limited
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved
ISSN: 1877-6361/doi:10.1108/S1877-636120220000027002
17
18 PRIYANKA VERN ET AL.

are robust and more successful and positively impact all the sectors of the emerging
economy, including the agri-food sector (Anastasiadis, Tsolakis, & Srai, 2018). Digital
technologies in the agri-food sector are transforming and evolving with time and changing
scenarios of how people, businesses, and government collaborate to enhance efficiency.
The adoption of digital technologies can help reduce uncertainty in supply chains
(Lezoche, Hernandez, Dı́az, Panetto, & Kacprzyk, 2020). The introduction of digital
technologies has shown positive trends, but the real challenge lies in its implementation
(Hernandez et al., 2017). Efficient implementation of digital technologies requires
addressing the various types of challenges perceived by stakeholders (Panetto, Panetto,
Hernandez, Diaz, & Kacprzyk, 2020). Miranda, Ponce, Molina, and Wright (2019) sug-
gested a framework called “S3 Product Development Reference,” which focuses on how
innovative, sensing, and sustainable concepts and solutions can be used to develop and
design new products and technology, which helps overcome various challenges faced in
AFSC.
Adoption and implementation of digital technologies are based on the different needs of
AFSC actors. Different actors like farmers may need custom applications for resource
optimization and efficiency. Producers may need IoT-based sensors and tools which assist
in precision farming and resource allocation according to crop, season, and soil quality.
Most of the countries have existing processes and strategies aimed at designing, devel-
oping, and applying innovative approaches to use digital technologies. At the same time,
there are several challenges perceived by the participants toward the adoption of digital
technologies. The complexity of Data management, lack of improvements, modernism,
gender disparities, and services are a few of the problems in the AFSC in the imple-
mentation of digital technologies (Annosi, Brunetta, Capo, & Heideveld, 2020).
Through this chapter, an effort is made to discuss a few relevant digital technologies
which can be implemented by AFSC participants for reducing the problems associated
with AFSC. Through literature review and personal interviews with supply chain partic-
ipants, the significant challenges perceived by different stakeholders of the AFSC were
identified. This chapter presents a few significant observations toward implementing digital
technologies in AFSC, which may be of significant use for industry participants and
policymakers.

2. DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES USED IN AGRI-FOOD

SUPPLY CHAINS
Digital technologies aim to exploit ground-breaking innovations and economic potential.
Derived from the concept of industry 4.0, digital innovations potentially eliminate the dif-
ference between what was once a discrete mechanism and make it more accessible, visible
throughout the system with many implementable actions. Artificial Intelligence (AI),
Internet of Things (IoT), mixed reality (a combination of augmented and virtual reality), 3D
printing, digital twin, and blockchain technology are a few technologies available toward
digital AFSC. AI has applications for precision agriculture, quality assessment, sales and
promotion predictions, behavioral assistance while purchasing, robotic support for assessing
and controlling diseases (Di Vaio, Boccia, Landriani, & Palladino, 2020; Kittipanya-Ngam
& Tan, 2020; Kumar, Singh, & Dwivedi, 2020; Renda, 2019). Similarly, IoT has
applications in forestry, crops and farming, urban agriculture, livestock, and fisheries
(Höller, Tsiatsis, Mulligan, Karnouskos, Avesand, & Boyle, 2014). 3D Printing is used to
produce elderly food, military and space food, confectionery, chocolates, peach jam,
Digital Technology in Agri-Food Supply Chain 19

processed cheese, blend of fruits and vegetables, meat (Liu, Zhang, Bhandari, & Wang,
2020; Nachal, Moses, Karthik, & Anandharamakrishnan, 2019; Derossi, Caporizzi,
Azzollini, & Severini, 2018; Serenó, Vallicrosa, Delgado, & Ciurana, 2012). Blockchain
technology is used to cater to solutions related to freight transportation/logistic issues (Salah,
Nizamuddin, Jayaraman, & Omar, 2019; Shardeo, Patil, & Madaan, 2020).
Blockchain Technology: Blockchain technology is defined as distributed and decen-
tralized database for recording transaction data (Papri et al., 2019). Blockchain consists of
different blocks where data are stored in the network. Through the PEST model of
analysis, Kumar et al. (2020) concluded that blockchain provides an efficient, transparent,
and low-cost handling supply chain. It can deliver real-time data to all the actors in the
supply chain on the safety status of food products. The agri-food and logistic sector use
blockchain technology for tracing and tracking products with the help of data retrieved by
IoT devices and sensors (Donatelli & Pisante, 2019). Blockchain technology provides
verifying sustainability to supply chain management. It allows measurement of the results
and performance of critical operational processes of the supply chain in an effective
manner (Gurtu & Johny, 2019). In a blockchain, data related to transactions and digital
activities are stored in the form of coded blocks/smaller datasets/public ledger that can be
reviewed at any point in the future by stakeholders of the supply chain (Antonucci et al.,
2019).
Internet of Things (IoT): IoT is a technology that aims to enhance the quality of AFSC
by tracing and tracking the food conditions and live-sharing the information with supply
chain stakeholders (Gunawan et al., 2018). The European commission information society
defines it as“Things having identities and virtual personalities operating in smart spaces
using intelligent interfaces to connect and communicate within social, environmental and
user contexts” Nur and Dikky (2020) suggested a food monitoring system for poultry
slaughterhouses based on IoT. They concluded that not only a model based on IoT could
improve the HACCP in poultry slaughtering, it can also contribute to a fast, efficient, and
effective way of food safety and control. IoT helps monitor, control, plan, and optimize
remotely intelligent supply chains and was conclusively proved through studies on a fish
supply chain (Verdouw, Wolfert, Beulens, & Rialland, 2016). Its application in the AFSC
is efficient and promising. It can assist in areas of precision farming, food production,
storage, logistics, and consumption. IoT in the AFSC gives real-time visibility and ensures
automated and intelligent actions required to maintain the highest quality, optimal settings
for production, and on-time delivery for consumption (Zhao, Fan, Zhu, Fu, & Fu, 2015).
For example, NEERxTechnovation in Gujarat, India-based ag-tech start-up, developed an
intelligent sensor called “SHOOL: Smart sensor for hydrology and land application” for
farm microclimate information dielectric technology. It is deployed as an IoT station for
continuous monitoring. This IoT station is solar-powered, which collects real-time data
and stores them on a cloud server. SHOOL helps in precision agriculture, soil health
monitoring, scheduling irrigation, preventing pest infestation, improving water and fer-
tilizer retention, drought prevention, and soil degradation. It reduces agri-input cost and
improves productivity (NEERxTechnovation, https://www.neerx.in/).
Artificial Intelligence (AI): AI can combine multiple technologies in different ways to
sense, comprehend, and act (Purdy & Daugherty, 2016). Smart drones and AI robotics are
already being used by companies like siemens and amazon in their supply chains (Birgitte,
Borole, Miao, Newbury, & CEO Innovation Intelligence, 2018). Di Vaio, Boccia,
Landriani, and Palladino (2020) explored the role of AI in AFSC concerning the sus-
tainable business model in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic. They concluded that to
create sustainable business models, AI will be playing a crucial role. It aids in improved
20 PRIYANKA VERN ET AL.

decision-making and management and enhances the process and efficiency of decision-
making and value creation by analyzing numerous data. AI (machine learning) assists in
selecting supply chain partners’ demand forecasting for direct marketing by creating
weekly demand forecasts based on inventory level, detecting false-positive RFID tag
readings during transportation (Wenzel, Smit, & Sardesai, 2019). Table 1 presents the
significant benefits, challenges, and enablers for the applications as mentioned above in the
AFSC.

3. MEASURES FOR ENHANCING THE ADOPTION OF DIGITAL

TECHNOLOGIES AT VARIOUS STAGES OF AGRI-FOOD
SUPPLY CHAINS
The fourth industrial revolution is changing the work environment, recuring people to
acquire new skills to excel (Hecklau, Galeitzke, Flachs, & Kohl, 2016). Several obstacles
must be solved to take full advantage of industry 4.0 technologies (Ing, Lee, Chan,
Alipal, & Hamid, 2019). In today’s dynamic business environment, to maximize
efficiency, companies pay considerable attention to implementing digital technologies in
their manufacturing processes to avoid danger and enhance environmental safety
alongside delivering higher quality goods to consumers and customers (Moktadir, Ali,
Kusi-Sarpong, & Shaikh, 2018). Companies alone cannot resolve the broad scope of
multiple and dynamic problems but involve collaborative industrial alliances and
employee support. Two of the most significant implementation challenges are uncertain
economic benefits and large financial investments (Koch, Kuge, Giessbauer, & Schrauf,
2014). Petrillo, Felice, Cioffi, and Zomparelli (2018) conclude three significant imple-
mentation challenges for developing countries viz. Training employees with specific skills
and education about the digital setup needs funds for strategic implementation planning
and scalability.
The future of AFSC should be regarded as an autonomous system rather than a con-
ventional system (Claudine & Kannusamy, 2018). Few of the measures for enhancing the
adoption of digital technologies may be reiterated as below (Donatelli & Pisante, 2019;
OECD Agriculture policy brief on The Digital Transformation of the Agriculture and
Food System, 2019; Giessbauer, Vedso, & Schrauf, 2016):

(1) Financial Measures: Business leaders should invest more in digital technologies to help
cost-saving and act as a value addition to the supply chain operations. Financial
investments in digital technologies would lead to lower production and maintenance
costs, logistics and inventory costs, and reduced lead time. With the implementation of
digital technologies, production efficiency would increase, customer satisfaction would
increase, as improved quality products would be delivered. Digital technologies are
strategic investments. According to a report by PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC) titled
“Digital factories 2020 shaping the future of manufacturing,” almost 50% of com-
panies and business leaders expect returns on their strategic investments in digital
technologies within five years and 3% expected returns on investment within the first
year.
(2) Government Measures: The government has made several efforts to encourage the
adoption of industry 4.0 by launching different policies like:
• National Manufacturing Policy, 2017
• National Program on AI
• Center of Excellence (CoE) on IT for Industry 4.0 Mission on Cyber-Physical
Systems.
Digital Technology in Agri-Food Supply Chain 21

Table 1. Applications: Benefits, Challenges, and Major Enablers.

S.No Technology Description References

1. Blockchain Benefits • Improves the functional aspects Abeyratne and Monfared (2016),
Technology of the supply chain like visibility, Apte and Petrovsky (2016), Ferrer
reliability, transparency, smart (2018), Ge et al. (2017), Kamilaris,
access to data, product trace- Fonts, and Prenafeta-Boldύ (2019),
ability which helps in real-time Lezoche et al. (2020), Lee,
product tracking and Mendelson, Rammohan, and
management of defective Srivastava (2017), Mezquita et al.
products. (2020), Renda (2019), Rogerson
• Environmental and social bene- and Parry (2020), Saurabh and Dey
fits, which include waste reduc- (2020), Stranieri, Riccardi,
tion, fewer intermediaries, safe Meuwissen, and Soregaroli (2021),
and quality food availability, and Tripoli and Schmidhuber (2018),
customer access to complete Wamba, Queiroz, and Trinchera
product information (2020), Yuan, Qiu, Bi, Chang, and
• Improved information availabil- Lam (2019)
ity, accessibility, and sharing,
fraud prevention
• Increase of profits and return on
investments
• Enhanced efficiency and quality
management
• Speedy deliveries and reduced
product distribution times
• Support for small farmers
• Secure way to perform trans-
actions between new parties, help
make agriculture more secure,
autonomous, and flexible
• Reduced potential for human
error and fraud creates trust in
product veracity
Challenges • System cost, participation, and Abeyratne and Monfared (2016),
integration across all the levels Apte and Petrovsky (2016), Ferrer
• Uncertain regulations and pol- (2018), Ge et al. (2017), Kamilaris
icies, technological issues like et al. (2019), Lee et al. (2017),
system compatibility, security, Renda (2019), Rogerson and Parry
etc. (2020), Saurabh and Dey (2020),
• Lack of required technical skill, Tripoli and Schmidhuber (2018),
lack of accessibility, insufficient Yadav, Singh, Raut, and
infrastructure, lack of trust and Govindarajan (2020), Yuan et al.
awareness among stakeholders (2019)
• Difficult for SMEs to adopt, may
lead to an enhanced digital
divide
Enablers • Introducing modular and cost- Kamilaris et al. (2019), Saurabh
effective versions, widespread use and Dey (2020), Wamba et al.
at international levels, awareness (2020), Yadav et al. (2020)
programs, and supportive
government policies, knowledge
sharing, and emphasis from
trading partners
2. IoT Benefits • Increasing competitiveness and Hou, Liao, and Luo (2021), Kosior
productivity and ensuring sus- (2018), Kumar et al. (2020),
tainable use of resources, ensure Miranda et al. (2019), Verdouw
food safety and quality, food et al. (2016), Witjaksono, Rabih,
type authenticity (Halal vs. Non- Yahya, and Alva (2018)
Halal)
22 PRIYANKA VERN ET AL.

Table 1. (Continued)
S.No Technology Description References

• Efficient data collection and

transmission, problem fore-
casting, facilitation of demand-
supply interface
• Build consumer trust by trans-
ferring real-time data related to
food, resolves issues related to
factory staff management, value
for transport users: lead time,
shipment tracking, autonomy
Challenges • Nonuniform distribution of ben- Annosi et al. (2020), Astill et al.
efits from digitization, knowl- (2019), Kosior (2018)
edge, access to the internet,
consumer acceptance
• Data security and Ownership
• Only exists at high granularity
level and management at lower
granularity level expensive, solu-
tions not available for lower level
Enablers • Complementary organizational Annosi et al. (2020), Jabbour,
capabilities, collaborations, Fiorini, Ndubisi, Queiroz, and
involvement of institution in Piato (2020)
defining policies, incentives, and
institutions
3. AI Benefits • Precision farming where AI can Birgitte et al. (2018), Di Vai et al.
help in smart crop management (2020), Kar, Dash, McMurtrey,
and robots can help in identi- and Rebman (2019), Kersten et al.
fying and correcting problems (2019), Kumar et al. (2020),
and diseases, empowerment of Metcalf, Askay, and Rosenberg
small farmers (2019), Renda (2019), Sachs et al.
• Technologies like a smartphone (2019)
camera, image processing,
remote sensing, computer vision
support behavioral assistance for
consumer purchase decisions
• Personalized nutrition services
for consumers, Food waste opti-
mization, and management
• Compensating for the labor
shortages, management of tem-
porary shortages, reduction of
environmental impacts
• Reduce environmental impact,
fill labor shortage, helps to ach-
ieve sustainable development
goals, increased profitability for
farmers, and open up new job
opportunities
Challenges • Agri-food data contracts being Annosi et al. (2020), Birgitte et al.
extremely complex (2018), Kar et al. (2019), Kersten
• Lack of sound knowledge among et al. (2019), Metcalf et al. (2019),
producers Renda (2019), Sachs et al. (2019)
• Risk of widening digital divide,
the complexity of data
Digital Technology in Agri-Food Supply Chain 23

Table 1. (Continued)
S.No Technology Description References

• Lack of incentives for adoption,

lack of services
• Reduce environmental impact,
fill the labor shortage
Enablers • Govt. policies Di Vaio et al. (2020), Kumar et al.
• Business models need to be (2020), Renda (2019)
redesigned as per the requirement
of technology
• Policies should facilitate and
incentivize digital purchases
Source: Authors.

This measure is focused on emerging tech start-ups or companies investing or working

on digital technologies. The government can give tax breaks to such companies during
the initial years, and subsidies can be provided to them. Through such measures, the
government can support and encourage digital culture.
(3) Technological Measures: Various operations within the system (internal system and
external system) can be connected through the implication of software like
manufacturing execution systems (MES). This IT-enabled system records and moni-
tors the overall activities occurring on the shop/factory floor. MES can support data
collection and acquisition, scheduling, process management, performance indicator,
document management, etc. Similarly, enterprise resource planning (ERP) is a system
that integrates and automates internal business operations within the supply chain,
that is, manufacturing, logistics, distribution, finance, and human resource. Adopting
such software may enhance connectivity, coordination of various stakeholders, buyers,
and suppliers, and interoperability of systems within a company for the smooth
functioning of all operations and lead to the sustainable production of goods in AFSC.
Adoption of these software helps in the efficient management of data. Data will
become easily accessible for every actor in the supply chain.
(4) Collaborative Measures: Big companies and ag-tech start-ups that deal with digital
technologies should collaborate with farmers (rural and urban), farmer producer
organizations (FPOs), and small agri start-ups working closely with farmers. By
collaborating with concerned actors, better results can be attained as this will
encourage farmers and Agri start-ups to invest in digital technologies, which will
ultimately lead to sustainable and smart supply chains. Elimination of uncertainties
and introducing innovation, collaboration, lean and green initiatives in the AFSC
would lead to safety, quality, and economic benefits (Mor, Singh, Bhardwaj, & Singh,
2015).
(5) Human Resource Measures: Human resource management is required in digital
infrastructure. A digital firm requires employees who are skilled enough to operate on
digital technologies. India’s current education system does not provide adequate
knowledge or degree programs in such a domain. Hence companies should invest in
training and education programs to provide proper skills and knowledge to older
employees. New employees who have expertise in such technologies should be hired.
Such investments encourage a digital culture within an organization/company.
24 PRIYANKA VERN ET AL.

(6) Organizational Measures: An organizational structure plays a vital role in digitization.

According to a report by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) titled “Digital Factories
2020: Shaping the future of manufacturing,” top management shall lead digital
technology implementation and embolden lifelong learning. Top management should
provide a digital work setup to employees to encourage digitalization.

4. INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE
The technology adoption at different stages of AFSC needs intervention and embracing
from the industry. With this view, an effort was made to contact food industry participants
to collect their perceptions about the involvement of digital technologies in the supply
chain. For this purpose, structured interviews were conducted with a few industry par-
ticipants, and information was collected through a structured questionnaire.
The Questionnaire: The Questionnaire had 21 general questions and was designed to
cover some significant dimensions of digital technologies in the AFSC. The questions were
divided into three significant categories viz. introduction of the respondents, including their
exposure to the various digital technologies in the AFSC, advantages of each of the
effective strategies, and their significant roadblocks faced by the respondents and their
companies.
The questionnaire had a mix of single-choice and multiple-choice questions to gauge the
respondents’ perspective for AFSC digitization and its impact. They were also asked to put
forth their views on the necessity of the same. The options in each question were arrived at
based on a thorough literature review and respondents’ comments. The open-ended
questions helped us take into account uncovered perspectives in the designed questions
backed by literature review.
Interview Sample and Profile: To conduct the interview, interviewees were sent out
invites through emails/personal contact/social media connections. All respondents were
either connected to the food industry or digital technologies. Interviewees’ profiles ranged
from students with limited exposure to the application of digital AFSC to the CFO
(founders) of companies. Also, employees with varied positions such as assistant managers
(in supply chain companies) to head-plant supply chains, quality officers, procurement
managers helped us incorporate different level challenges in the larger digitization scheme.

4.1 Interview Outcomes

4.1.1 Exposure of Respondents in Different Fields within the Food Sector
87.5% of the total respondents were from the food sector, and the remaining 12.5 % were
linked to digital supply chain technology. All respondents had exposure to digital tech-
nologies in the AFSC, with the distribution discussed ranging from low to high.

4.1.2 Exposure to Digital Technologies

56.3% of the respondents were familiar with blockchain technologies, and 93.8% were
either working with or had been introduced to the smart technologies. AI or Robotics was
the second most popular digital technology, with 81.3% of the respondents aware of it. It
was also found that companies were more inclined to use the IoT(56.3%) or were already
using the technology. However, all of them agreed that digital technologies are the future
of AFSCs (100%).
Digital Technology in Agri-Food Supply Chain 25

4.1.3 Perceived Benefits from Three Different Technologies

The respondents perceive different levels of benefits from the technologies, viz. blockchain
technology, IoT, and AI. IoT is considered a building element for the AFSC because of its
pervasiveness, interoperability, and sociability. It establishes the framework for data
collection and transmission. IoT has been proven advantageous compared to manual
tracking of organization assets or store management by using simple devices such as RFID
to track and maintain inventory levels and improve transparency. Additionally, IoT is
beneficial because it adds to movement transparency of goods which renders under the
Table 2 transfers, wastage, manual errors, misuse of the commodities impossible (mostly).
It adds to the security in the entire supply chain and brings down the eventual cost to the
organization. IoT has interoperability across all sections of the AFSC. Lastly, downtime
prevention is a boon that IoT offers amongst its various motivators. The easy imple-
mentation strategies and affordable cost make it one of the most exponentially growing
digital technologies across all sectors, especially the AFSC.
On the other hand, Blockchain Technology provides benefits like transparency and
integrity, also lowering the financing cost for all supply chain stakeholders. It is indeed
essential for organizations dealing with several third-party stakeholders in the supply chain
to secure and record their transactions in the supply chain. Being a decentralized system,
blockchain maintains the integrity of transactions to the parties involved, providing cost-
effective, safe, validated, authorized, independent ways that cannot be deleted by any
member, thereby increasing transparency and security. This not only infuses trust between
the involved parties as a copy of each transaction is saved with each of the stakeholders of
the transaction, making it transparent, accessible (only to stakeholders).
AI, although undoubtedly one of the most effective tools of digital technologies due to
its ability to recognize the business phenomenon, trend, seek information, and manage
data intelligently, has been sparingly used in the supply chain. However, AI-based supply
chains can assist demand forecasting, customer relationship management (CRM), nego-
tiations, order picking through agent-based systems. Genetic algorithms create complex
but compelling network designs that assist the organization in managing its resources,
clients, and stakeholders effectively. Additionally, AI also assists in inventory planning,
making decisions, supplier selections through complex data analysis and generating trends.
AI is an effective decision-making tool that helps make effective decisions that aid in future
planning that forms a basis for every organization’s goals, product launches, supplier

Table 2. Perceived Benefits of the Different Technologies by the Respondents.

Parameter Blockchain IoT AI

Benefits of Transparency and Integration

Integration
Benefits of Traceability
Resource Saving
Legal Boundaries

Better Market and Supplier Access

Data Security

Source: Author.
26 PRIYANKA VERN ET AL.

selection, production capacity, hiring across departments, etc. AI tools have proven
effective in handling complex forecasting issues and ensuring client-organization effective
relationships through a well-structured and transparent customer relationship manage-
ment structure.

4.1.4 Implementation Challenges

Considering the advantages mentioned above and the different uses of emerging tech-
nologies, Industry 4.0 is bound to numerous obstacles. This chapter has indicated that
there are numerous problems faced by leaders and managers at the implementation level.
The top four digital transition failures according to respondents are attributed to poor
planning and lack of awareness among leaders, viz. training of existing staff (68.8%),
financial constraints (50%), unclear economic benefits by the implementation of digital
technologies (50%), recruitment of skilled employees (37.5%).

4.1.5 Significant Motivators for the Adoption of Digital Technologies

In our interviews, the responses corroborated our understanding that three kinds of effi-
ciencies – what we term as 3E’s – are the primary motivators for adopting smart tech-
nology in the AFSC. The first is “Cost Efficiency” – which allows for cost reduction and
pushes for judicious use of available resources (whether economical or natural), thus
ensuring less wastage. It helps in promoting financially and environmentally sustainable
organisational practices. The second is the “Operational Efficiency” – an outcome of
improved digitization, connectivity, and data management due to digital transformation at
various levels of the operational chain. This helps in cost and time optimisations and leads
to the creation of a learning organization with robust knowledge management systems
based on blockchain technology. Finally, the third “E” is “Process Efficiency,” – which
focuses on designing and developing optimal processes for production. Process efficiency
can be ensured by introducing smart technologies like IoT for equipment optimization that
leads to Overall Equipment Efficiency (OEE) within any production process/plant. A
common motivator that underlies and is a necessary precondition for other motivators to
be seamlessly implemented across all levels of the organization, including all stakeholders,
is good leadership with a long-term vision and strategic resolve to adapt to changing
external and internal business environments.

5. FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH

This study was conducted in the Indian context for agri-food industries. However, the
results could be used for other developing nations with further modifications. Our results
are qualitative based on industry experts. Results can be biased. For future research, a
study can be conducted using quantitative data for various actors, and statistical tools and
models can increase the power and validity to produce fair results.
Further, a comparative study can be conducted by taking into consideration different
developing economies. Blockchain technology, for example, has been mostly studied
theoretically for its challenges, and therefore more implementation studies should be done
to understand its nature truly. Blockchain offers a nondestructible and trustworthy hack-
proof system that can ensure good transactions but developments and applications need to
be closely examined to get the most advantage out of this bussing technology. Although AI
is a divisive and thoroughly practiced tool across various industries due to its advantages
Digital Technology in Agri-Food Supply Chain 27

to the parent organization, in supply chain management, it is limited due to higher cost
involvement, complex structures across the organization, and massive back-end work.
Studies that highlight the various AI applications across AFSC industries with existing
non-AI structures should be done to address this. Integration of AI in supply chains
stakeholders and knowledge management are some of the critical areas of study. The IoT
has been effective in tackling most of the issues related to the AFSC. However, critical
analysis of legal implications, if any, needs to be done extensively. Concerns related to
humanity and workforce implications also need to be addressed that may drastically lead
to unequal distribution of wealth, especially in growing economies. Therefore, the ethical
impacts of the IoT need to be studied closely, and the factors discussed extensively.

6. CONCLUSION
Many developing and developed countries are implementing the emerging technologies of
industry 4.0. More companies are adapting to digital solutions and tools in the current era,
that is, the IoT, AI, blockchain technology, 3D food printing, robotics, drones, etc. It is
advisable to focus on the complete set of digital technologies to make the best benefit out
of them, rather than focusing on any single technology. Although blockchain and AI have
great potential to contribute toward improving AFSC, the challenges associated with their
adoption need to be addressed carefully. This chapter has analyzed various challenges
faced at the implementation phase of technologies in AFSC for Indian companies through
literature review and primary survey. The significant challenges surfaced are a trained
workforce, high investments, and clarity on economic gains from digitalization. Various
strategies are also suggested on different organizational, technological, governmental,
human resource, collaborative, and financial measures. Applications of sensors, smart
machines, devices, and information technology will make operations more convenient and
easier to be performed.

REFERENCES
Abeyratne, S. A., & Monfared, R. P. (2016). Blockchain ready manufacturing supply chain using distributed
ledger. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 5(9), 1–10.
Anastasiadis, F., Tsolakis, N., & Srai, J. S. (2018). Digital technologies towards resource efficiency in the agri-food
sector: Key challenges in developing countries. Sustainability, 10(12). doi:10.3390/su10124850
Annosi, M. C., Brunetta, F., Capo, F., & Heideveld, L. (2020). Digitalization in the agri-food industry: The
relationship between technology and sustainable development. Management Decision.
Antonucci, F., Figorilli, S., Costa, C., Pallottino, F., Raso, L., & Menesatti, P. (2019). A review on blockchain
applications in the agri-food sector. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 99(14), 6129–6138. doi:
10.1002/jsfa.9912
Apte, S., & Petrovsky, N. (2016). Will blockchain technology revolutionize excipient supply chain management?
Journal of Excipients and Food Chemicals, 7(3), 76–78.
Astill, J., Dara, A. R., Campbel, M., Farber, M. J., Fraser, G. D. E., Sharif, S., & Yada, Y. Y. (2019).
Transparency in food supply chains: A review of enabling technology solutions. Trends in Food Science &
Technology, 91, 240–247. ISSN 0924-2244. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2019.07.024
Birgitte, A., Borole, S., Miao, M., Newbury, S., & CEO Innovation Intelligence. (2018). Future supply chains with
artificial intelligence. Retrieved from https://www.biginnovationcentre.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/
BIC_FUTURE-SUPPLY-CHAINS-WITH-ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE_28.04.2018.pdf
Claudine, S., & Kannusamy, R. (2018). Scope for industry 4.0 in agri-food supply chain. In The road to a digi-
talized supply chain management: Smart and digital solutions for supply chain management. Proceedings of
the Hamburg international conference of logistics (HICL) (pp. 37–56).
28 PRIYANKA VERN ET AL.

Derossi, A., Caporizzi, R., Azzollini, D., & Severini, C. (2018). Application of 3D printing for customized food. A
case on the development of a fruit-based snack for children. Journal of Food Engineering, 220, 65–75. doi:
10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2017.05.015
Di Vaio, A., Boccia, F., Landriani, L., & Palladino, R. (2020). Artificial intelligence in the agri-food system:
Rethinking sustainable business models in the COVID-19 scenario. MDPI. Retrieved from https://
www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/4851/pdf
Donatelli, M., & Pisante, M. (2019). Digital agriculture and the Agridigit project, Italy: Contribution to the OECD
TIP digital and open innovation project.
Ferrer, E. C. (2018). The blockchain: A new framework for robotic swarm systems. In Proceedings of the future
technologies conference (pp. 1037–1058). Cham: Springer.
Ge, L., Brewster, C., Spek, J., Smeenk, A., Top, J., van Diepen, F., … de Wildt, M. D. R. (2017). Blockchain for
agriculture and food. Wageningen: Wageningen Economic Research. No. 2017-112.
Giessbauer, R., Vedso, J., & Schrauf, S. (2016). Global industry 4.0 survey report on industry 4.0: Building the
digital enterprise (2nd ed., pp. 1–34). London: PriceWaterhouseCooper.
Gurtu, A., & Johny, J. (2019). Potential of blockchain technology in supply chain management: A literature
review. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 49(9), 881–900. doi:10.1108/
IJPDLM-11-2018-0371
Hecklau, F., Galeitzke, M., Flachs, S., & Kohl, H. (2016). Holistic approach for human resource management in
industry 4.0. Procedia CIRP, 54(December), 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2016.05.102
Hernandez, J., JanuszKacprzyk, H. P., Fernandez, A., Liu, S., Ortiz, A., & De-Angelis, M. (2017). Challenges and
solutions for enhancing agriculture value chain decision-making. A short review. In 18th working con-
ference on virtual enterprises (PROVE), Vicenza, Italy (pp. 761–774). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-65151-4_68
Höller, J., Tsiatsis, V., Mulligan, C., Karnouskos, S., Avesand, S., & Boyle, D. (2014). From machine-to-machine
to the internet of things: Introduction to a new age of intelligence. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/
From-Machine—Machine-Internet-Things/dp/012407684X/
Hou, L., Liao, R., & Luo, Q. (2021). IoT and blockchain-based smart agri-food supply chains. In J. C. Augusto
(Ed.), Handbook of smart cities. Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-15145-4_91-1
Ing, T. S., Lee, T. C., Chan, S. W., Alipal, J., & Hamid, N. A. (2019). An overview of the rising challenges in
implementing industry 4.0. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 8(6), 1181–1188.
Jabbour, C. J. C., Fiorini, P. D. C., Ndubisi, N. O., Queiroz, M. M., & Piato, É. L. (2020). Digitally-enabled
sustainable supply chains in the 21st century: A review and a research agenda. The Science of the Total
Environment, 725, 138177.
Kamble, S. S., Gunasekaran, A., & Gawankar, S. A. (2020). Achieving sustainable performance in a data-driven
agriculture supply chain: A review for research and applications. International Journal of Production
Economics, 219, 179–194.
Kamilaris, A., Fonts, A., & Prenafeta-Boldύ, F. X. (2019). The rise of blockchain technology in agriculture and
food supply chains. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 91, 640–652.
Kar, U., Dash, R., McMurtrey, M., & Rebman, C. (2019). Application of artificial intelligence in automation of
supply chain management. Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability, 14. doi:10.33423/
jsis.v14i3.2105
Kersten, W., Blecker, T., & Ringle, C. M. (Eds.). (2019). Artificial intelligence and digital transformation in supply
chain management: Innovative approaches for supply chains. In Proceedings of the Hamburg international
conference of logistics (HICL). Berlin: epubli GmbH. No. 27. ISBN 978-3-7502-4947-9. doi:10.15480/
882.2460
Kittipanya-ngam, P., & Tan, K. H. (2020). A framework for food supply chain digitalization: Lessons from
Thailand. Production Planning & Control, 31(2–3), 158–172. doi:10.1080/09537287.2019.1631462
Koch, V., Kuge, S., Giessbauer, R., & Schrauf, S. (2014). Industry 4.0 opportunities and challenges of the industrial
internet (pp. 1–52). London: PriceWaterhouseCooper.
Kosior, K. (2018). Digital transformation in the agri-food sector–opportunities and challenges. Roczniki (Annals),
2018 (1230-2019-3703).
Kumar, R., Singh, R. K., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2020). Application of industry 4.0 technologies in SMEs for ethical
and sustainable operations: Analysis of challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 275, 124063. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124063
Lee, H. L., Mendelson, H., Rammohan, S., & Srivastava, A. (2017). Technology in agribusiness: Opportunities to
drive value. White paper. Stanford, CA: Stanford Graduate School of Business.
Lezoche, M., Hernandez, J. E., Dı́az, M. D. M. E. A., Panetto, H., & Kacprzyk, J. (2020). Agri-food 4.0: A survey
of the supply chains and technologies for the future agriculture. Computers in Industry, 117, 103187.
Liu, Z., Zhang, M., Bhandari, B., & Wang, Y. (2020). 3D printing: Printing precision and application in food
sector. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 69, 83–94. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2017.08.018
Digital Technology in Agri-Food Supply Chain 29

Metcalf, L., Askay, D. A., & Rosenberg, L. B. (2019). Keeping humans in the loop: Pooling knowledge through
artificial swarm intelligence to improve business decision making. California Management Review, 61,
84–109.
Mezquita, Y., González-Briones, A., Casado-Vara, R., Chamoso, P., Prieto, J., & Corchado, J. M. (2020).
Blockchain-based architecture: A MAS proposal for efficient agri-food supply chains. In P. Novais, J.
Lloret, P. Chamoso, D. Carneiro, E. Navarro, & S. Omatu (Eds.), Ambient intelligence – software and
applications –, 10th international symposium on ambient intelligence. ISAMI 2019. Advances in intelligent
systems and computing (Vol. 1006). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-24097-4_11
Miranda, J., Ponce, P., Molina, A., & Wright, P. (2019). Sensing, smart and sustainable technologies for Agri-
Food 4.0. Computers in Industry, 108, 21–36.
Moktadir, M. A., Ali, S. M., Kusi-Sarpong, S., & Shaikh, M. A. A. (2018). Assessing challenges for implementing
Industry 4.0: Implications for process safety and environmental protection. Process Safety and Environ-
mental Protection, 117, 730–741. doi:10.1016/j.psep.2018.04.020
Mor, R. S., Singh, S., Bhardwaj, A., & Singh, L. (2015). Technological implications of supply chain practices in
agri-food sector-A review. International Journal of Supply and Operations Management, 2(2), 720–747. doi:
10.22034/2015.2.03
Nachal, N., Moses, J. A., Karthik, P., & Anandharamakrishnan, C. (2019). Applications of 3D printing in food
processing. Food Engineering Reviews, 11(3), 123–141. doi:10.1007/s12393-019-09199-8
Nur, H., & Dikky, I. (2020). Food safety monitoring system using IoT in the poultry slaughterhouse. IOP Con-
ference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 519, 012043.
OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries., Agriculture policy brief on digital transformation of the agriculture and
food system, Published on February 11, 2019, pp. 1–2. Accessed on January 20, 2021.
Panetto, M. L., Hernandez, J., Diaz, M. M. E. A., & Kacprzyk, J. (2020). Special issue on Agri-Food 4.0 and
digitalization in agriculture supply chains – new directions, challenges and applications. Computers in
Industry, 116, 103188. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2020.103188ff.hal-02450378
Petrillo, A., De Felice, F., Cioffi, R., & Zomparelli, F. (2018). Fourth industrial revolution: Current practices,
challenges, and opportunities. Digital Transformation in Smart Manufacturing, 1–20. doi:10.5772/
intechopen.72304
Purdy, M., & Daugherty, P. (2016). Why AI is the future of growth. Management Information Systems, October,
1–72. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019
Renda, A. (2019). The age of foodtech: Optimizing the agri-food chain with digital technologies. In R. Valentini,
J. Sievenpiper, M. Antonelli, & K. Dembska (Eds.), Achieving the sustainable development goals through
sustainable food systems. Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-23969-5_10
Rogerson, M., & Parry, G. (2020). Blockchain: Case studies in food supply chain visibility. Supply Chain Man-
agement: An International Journal. ahead-of-print. doi:10.1108/SCM-08-2019-0300
Sachs, J. D., Schmidt-Traub, G., Mazzucato, M., Messner, D., Nakicenovic, N., & Rockström, J. (2019). Six
transformations to achieve the sustainable development goals. Nature Sustainability, 2, 805–814.
Salah, K., Nizamuddin, N., Jayaraman, R., & Omar, M. (2019). Blockchain-based soybean traceability in agri-
cultural supply chain. IEEE Access, 7, 73295–73305. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2918000
Saurabh, S., & Dey, K. (2020). Blockchain technology adoption, architecture, and sustainable agri-food supply
chains. Journal of Cleaner Production, 284, 124731.
Serenó, L., Vallicrosa, G., Delgado, J., & Ciurana, J. (2012). A new application for food customization with
additive manufacturing technologies. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1431(Mesic 2011), 825–833. doi:
10.1063/1.4707640
Shardeo, V., Patil, A., & Madaan, J. (2020). Critical success factors for blockchain technology adoption in freight
transportation using fuzzy ANP-modified TISM approach. International Journal of Information Technol-
ogy and Decision Making, 19(6), 1549–1580. doi:10.1142/S0219622020500376
Stranieri, S., Riccardi, F., Meuwissen, M. P., & Soregaroli, C. (2021). Exploring the impact of blockchain on the
performance of agri-food supply chains. Food Control, 119, 107495.
Tripoli, M., & Schmidhuber, J. (2018). Emerging opportunities for the application of blockchain in the agri-food
industry. FAO and ICTSD: Rome and Geneva Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.
Verdouw, C. N., Wolfert, J., Beulens, A. J. M., & Rialland, A. (2016). Virtualization of food supply chains with
the internet of things. Journal of Food Engineering, 176, 128–136. ISSN 0260-8774. doi:10.1016/
j.jfoodeng.2015.11.009
Wamba, S. F., Queiroz, M. M., & Trinchera, L. (2020). Dynamics between blockchain adoption determinants and
supply chain performance: An empirical investigation. International Journal of Production Economics, 229,
107791.
Wenzel, H., Smit, D., & Sardesai, S. (2019). A literature review on machine learning in supply chain management.
Fraunhofer Institute for Material Flow and Logistics IML. ISSN (online) 2365-5070.
30 PRIYANKA VERN ET AL.

Witjaksono, G., Rabih, A., Yahya, N., & Alva, S. (2018). IOT for agriculture: Food quality and safety. IOP
Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 343. doi:10.1088/1757-899X/343/1/012023
Yadav, V. S., Singh, A. R., Raut, R. D., & Govindarajan, U. H. (2020). Blockchain technology adoption barriers
in the Indian agricultural supply chain: An integrated approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
161, 104877.
Yuan, H., Qiu, H., Bi, Y., Chang, S. -H., & Lam, A. (2019). Analysis of coordination mechanism of supply chain
management information system from the perspective of block chain. Information Systems and e-Business
Management, 1–23.
Zhao, X., Fan, H., Zhu, H., Fu, Z., & Fu, H. (2015). The design of the internet of things solution for food supply
chain. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Education, Management, Information and
Medicine, 8(Emim), 314–318. doi:10.2991/emim-15.2015.61