Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology, Allahabad

Mid Semester M.Tech Progress Presentation

Identification of barriers in the implementation of IoT in Indian Agricultural system

Thesis Supervisor
Dr. Manish Gupta Presented By
Satyam Bhardwaj
Mechanical Engineering Department
Reg. No.- 2020PR17
MNNIT, Allahabad
 Barriers Identification

1. Interoperability:

Standardization is key to achieving universally accepted specifications and

protocols for true interoperability between devices and applications.

The IoT includes a diverse variety of heterogeneous devices; if these

devices utilize disparate standards and protocols, achieving high degree of
interoperability is challenging

To communicate and exchange data efficiently between different

infrastructures, Interoperability is important
2. IoT Security and Privacy:

The lack of adequate security may lead to loss of data, bridge of privacy, and
access to raw information about on-field parameters. This can compromise the
competitive advantages of private farm owners.
In agriculture, the IoT devices are vulnerable to physical tampering, such as
theft or attacks by predators and animals, different security breach cases such
as Data Theft, SQL Injection attack, etc. at different layers of IoT.
• 3. Cost:

There are several cost associated with the deployment of IoT in agriculture
which can be categorized into setup cost and running cost. The setup cost
includes purchase of hardware (IoT solutions).
The running cost involves continuous subscription for use of centralized
services or IoT platforms which provides data collection, management of
IoT devices, sharing of information among other services.
4. Lack of awareness & Knowledge:

One of the major barrier of IoT implementation is “Farmer’s resistance to

change”, which is caused by lack of awareness.
Farmers in developing countries are often located in rural areas where
most of them are uneducated. The inability of information utilization by
such farmers could be a major obstacle for the integration of IoT and other
technologies in agriculture.
The farmer’s inability to use information could be a major barrier when
Human intervention is required to assist IoT services.
5. Infrastructure:

Infrastructure requirements include availability of internet connectivity,

availability of power, farm equipments etc.
In Rural areas IoT implementation may get restricted by the lack of adequate
Infrastructure.
6. Scalability:

Scalability of IoT systems is the ability to support an increasing number of

connected devices, users, application features, and analytics capabilities,
without any degradation in the quality of service.
The main objective of making the device scalable is to meet the changing
demands and they can never be static since the interest of people and taste
changes with time as well as the environmental conditions.
7. Government support & Policies:

Government needs to establish Regulation and legal frameworks regarding the

control and ownership of farm data between farmers and IoT solution
providers.
Current Ag value chain is facing low productivity and declining profitability,
due to this IoT solution providers getting limited ROI: Government can
provide financial aid to these solution providers, by partnering with them or by
providing funds.
Government needs to provide “Dedicated Farmer Training” for more formal
agriculture education to overcome farmer’s resistance to change.
8. Networking Challenges:

Due to high cost of wiring, wireless communication is most important for the
deployment of IoT based agriculture.
Communication signals from IoT devices become weak when they reach the
transceivers due to many physical obstacles in the agriculture field. As such,
the most reliable and robust networking technologies should be used to
transfer data in agricultural environment
9. Choice of Technology:

There are several IoT technologies that have been developed recently, some of
which are still going through pilot test. Currently, it is difficult to tell
which of the new IoT technologies will dominate the market
Choice of Technology is an implementation barrier, because selected
Technologies should be able to provide:
• Suitability for small scale, medium scale and large scale farms
• Suitability for different geographical conditions & Climate conditions.
• Support for roaming
10. Reliability:

The Internet of Things devices are intended to be installed outdoors. This

exposes the devices to extreme environmental factors, As such, the external
impacts may cause the IoT devices fail to communicate and unable to send the
collected data to the server or cloud on time.
 ISM MODELLING
ISM methodology comprises of these following steps:

1. After identification of barriers (variables), pairwise comparison was made to

obtain the contextual relationships among all the barriers..
2. To indicate pairwise relationship among variables, a Structural Self Interaction
matrix (SSIM) is established.
3. Conversion of SSIM into the “initial reachability matrix is done, and then
transitivity check is done for reachability matrix. Transitivity of relation signifies
that if a variable i is related to j and j is related to k Then i and k will also related.
4. The final reachability matrix is partitioned into different levels.
5. After level partitioning, a directed graph is drawn and transitive link are removed.
6. Then the diagraph is converted into ISM model.
B1. Interoperability
B2. IoT security & Privacy
B3. Cost
B4. Lack of Awareness & Knowledge
B5. Infrastructure
B6. Scalability
B7. Government support & Policies
B8. Networking Challenges
B9. Choice of technology
B10. Reliability
SSIM MATRIX

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10
B1 V X O A V O A O V
B2 X A A V A A A X
B3 A A A A X V X
B4 V O A O O O
B5 X O V O V
B6 O A A O
B7 O O O
B8 A V
B9 V
B10
INITIAL REACHABILITY MATRIX

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10

B1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

B2 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

B3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1

B4 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

B5 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1

B6 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0

B7 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0

B8 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

B9 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1

B10 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
FINAL REACHABILTY MATRIX AFTER INCORPORATING TRANSIVITY

Driving
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 power

B1 1 1 1 0 1* 1 0 1* 1* 1 8

B2 1* 1 1 0 1* 1 0 1* 1* 1 8

B3 1 1 1 0 0 1* 0 1 1 1 7

B4 1* 1 1 1 1 1* 0 1* 1* 1* 9
B5 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1* 1 8

B6 1* 1* 1 0 1 1 0 1* 1* 1* 8

B7 1* 1 1 1 1* 1* 1 1* 1* 1* 10

B8 1 1 1 0 1* 1 0 1 1* 1 8

B9 1* 1 1* 0 1* 1 0 1 1 1 8
B10 1* 1 1 0 0 1* 0 1* 1* 1 7

Dependence 10 10 10 2 8 10 1 10 10 10
 LEVEL PARTITIONING
1ST ITERATION
E R.S. A.S. I.S. LVL
B1 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

B2 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

B3 B1,B2,B3, B6, B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3, B6, B8,B9,B10 1

B4 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B4,B7 B4,B7

B5 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6, B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9 B1,B2,B5,B6,B8,B9

B6 B1,B2,B3, B5,B6, B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3, B5,B6, B8,B9,B10

B7 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B7 B7

B8 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

B9 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

B10 B1,B2,B3,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

2nd ITERATION

E R.S. A.S. I.S. LVL

B4 B4,B5,B6 B4,B7 B4

B5 B5,B6 B4,B5,B6,B7 B5,B6 2

B6 B5,B6 B4,B5,B6,B7 B5,B6 2

B7 B4,B5,B6,B7 B7 B7
3rd ITERATION

E R.S. A.S. I.S. LVL

B4 B4 B4,B7 B4 3

B7 B4,B7 B7 B7

4th ITERATION

E R.S. A.S. I.S. LVL

B7 B7 B7 B7 4
 ALL ITERATION LEVEL PARTITIONING

E R.S. A.S. I.S. LVL

B1 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

B2 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

B3 B1,B2,B3, B6, B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3, B6, B8,B9,B10 1

B4 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B4,B7 B4,B7 3

B5 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6, B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9 B1,B2,B5,B6,B8,B9 2

B6 B1,B2,B3, B5,B6, B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3, B5,B6, B8,B9,B10 2

B7 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B7 B7 4

B8 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

B9 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B5,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

B10 B1,B2,B3,B6,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10 B1,B2,B3,B6,B8,B9,B10 1

 Choice
IoT security and Networking
Interoperability Cost Of Reliability
privacy challenges
Technology

Infrastructure Scalability

Lack of Awareness
&
Knowledge

Regulatory
Challenges
&
Government Policies

ISM MODEL DIAGRAPH

Factor Classification:
• Driving Power and Dependence in final reachability matrix will help us to
classify the factors into different categories.

a) Autonomous Factors: These factors are having weak dependence power and
weak driving power. These factors do not affect the system and also are not influenced
by the system. Barriers of this region do not affect the system and
also do not get influenced by the system.
b) Linkage Factors: These factors have strong dependence power as well as strong
driving power. These factors are not stable, any action taken on these factor can affect
the system. Barriers belonging to this category are not stable
because any step taken on them can affect the system
c) Dependent Factors: These factors are having weak driving power and strong
dependence power
d) Independent Factors: These factors have less dependence power and high driving
power, also called as “key factors”.
 B1. Interoperability
B2. IoT security & Privacy
10 B3. Cost
B5. Infrastructure
B6. Scalability
9 B8. Networking Challenges
B9. Choice of technology
8 B10. Reliability
7
Linkage barriers
6 Independent barriers
Dependence power

B4. Lack of Awareness & Knowledge

5 B7. Government support & policies
4

1 Dependent barriers
Autonomous barriers

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Driving power MICMAC analysis
 REFERENCES
1. Elijah, O., Rahman, T. A., Orikumhi, I., Leow, C. Y., & Hindia, M. N. (2018). An Overview of Internet of Things (IoT) and Data
Analytics in Agriculture: Benefits and Challenges. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 5(5), 3758-3773. [8372905]. https://
doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2018.2844296
2. Bam Bahadur Sinha, R. Dhanalakshmi, Recent advancements and challenges of Internet of Things in smart agriculture: A
survey, Future Generation Computer Systems, Volume 126, 2022, Pages 169-184, ISSN 0167-739X, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2021.08.006.
3. M. S. Farooq, S. Riaz, A. Abid, K. Abid and M. A. Naeem, "A Survey on the Role of IoT in Agriculture for the
Implementation of Smart Farming," in IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 156237-156271, 2019, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2949703
4. M. R. M. Kassim, "IoT Applications in Smart Agriculture: Issues and Challenges," 2020 IEEE Conference on Open Systems
(ICOS), 2020, pp. 19-24, doi: 10.1109/ICOS50156.2020.9293672.
5. Mirani, Azeem & Memon, Muhammad Suleman & Rahu, Mushtaque & Bhatti, Mairaj & Ramzan, Umair. (2019). A Review
of Agro-Industry in IoT: Applications and Challenges. 28-33.
6. Naveen, Soumyalatha. (2016). Study of IoT: Understanding IoT Architecture, Applications, Issues and Challenges.
7. Carsten Maple (2017) Security and privacy in the internet of things, Journal of Cyber Policy, 2:2, 155-184, DOI:
10.1080/23738871.2017.136653
8. O. Friha, M. A. Ferrag, L. Shu, L. Maglaras and X. Wang, "Internet of Things for the Future of Smart Agriculture: A
Comprehensive Survey of Emerging Technologies," in IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 718-752,
April 2021, doi: 10.1109/JAS.2021.1003925.