I remember, as a primary level student writing sentences like Nepal is a patriarchal country without understanding the gravity of it. It is fair to say Nepal still is a patriarchal country. However women’s representation post people’s movement of 2062/63 B.S. has improved with the law guaranteeing 33% compulsory women participation. No doubt this was a huge win for women across the country but it came without real struggle. I am not saying that women in society didn’t struggle, they still do; what I am saying is this came without a structured protest, without a political battle from women themselves and at times felt a bit panspermic just like the concept of federalism and secularism in Nepal. Politicians will take pride in the fact that a women president, chief justice, speaker of the house have been there along with 33% representation then in constitution assembly and now representatives council. It would be naïve to think that these statistics is a fair representation of women in our society. As Benjamin Disraeli says there are three types of lies — lies, damn lies, and statistics.
The premise is formation of zone sanchalak samiti (a farmer’s executive body that plans and implements programs in the respective command areas cooperating with respective zone implementation unit of PMAMP) in vegetable zone Dhading under Prime Minister Agriculture Modernization Project (PMAMP). All the representatives from listed vegetable cooperatives, farmers groups and private firms had been gathered at Shree Chandrodaya higher secondary school, Bishaltar. The total number of members in that samiti to be formed is 9 and the total wards in the area is 15, so the equation of equal representation from each ward is out of the question. There already is disagreement regarding which wards to forsake its own representative and get combined with another ward. The disagreement got really heated when 3 out of those 9 had to be filled compulsory by female and one of the female had to have one of the three vital posts of the committee.
No one wanted to send a female representative from their ward. There were calls that the wards nearer to the office of zone implementation unit should give female leaders as they are nearby and females from nearby would attend the meetings easily after finishing their household chores. With some discord two nearby wards complied and now to the relief of male representatives and farmer leaders only one female had to be chosen. Then the call began and each ward was asked one by one if they could send a female representative to the committee and each one of them declined. It was supposedly a loss if they couldn’t get a male to represent their wards.
In this meeting there already was a compulsion set by zone implementation unit to the cooperatives that one out of the three representatives to attend this committee formation meeting had to be female. So, there were fair number of female present in this meeting but no more than what was compulsory prescribed by the zone implementation unit. One could easily see that only four female representatives were sitting on the front row and rests of them were languishing at the end of the hall. There were clearly segments of male and female which formed in itself like magic. An alien observing this meeting would have probably guessed this segregated seating of male and female as a human decorum.
Hours were spent negotiating this very point and a couple of women burst their anger with disgust towards the proceedings and the manner in which female participation was being discussed not by some autocrats of bygone era but by their brothers, fathers and neighbors. One woman from the back stood up and asked why just three and why not all nine positions be held by women if they are capable. She pointed out to the fact that large numbers of males from community had migrated abroad for jobs and females were already lifting the bulk share of work in the field and made a case that the same be held true at this proposed samiti. No one disagreed with her, no one replied to her claim, everyone was silenced and the discussion moved on. It was not hard to see that no one entertained her statement as a realistic solution. This meeting could not reach to a conclusion and couldn’t set the template for committee formation and a deadline of a week was set for negotiation and committee formation.
I was there to learn how farmers discuss, work and solve their issues. I observed that, learned a thing or two. I left the hall with this thought- can woman in Nepal fight beyond their allocated 33% and earn their place at the table or will submit to their male counterparts and relish in their 33%?
The fifth graduate research conference was organized by I-SET Nepal, Resources Himalaya, CDES TU, Schems on 2012/04/5–6 on Hotel Himalaya, Kupondole.
My review paper entitled “Potential Benefits to Nepalese Agriculture from Blockchain Technology was presented here. The objectives of this paper was to assess the current state of literature on application of this technology in agriculture, propose a theoretical framework for Nepalese agriculture export supply chain and finally point out potential benefits and constraints in adoption of this technology.
Blockchain basically is an internet based technology which allows two parties/individuals to carry out without need of trusted third party. It is a shared ledger where records are kept in every computer participating in that node. Blocks are basically a set of data and blocks are linked by cryptographic hash and proof of work. You might have heard about the crypto currency Bitcoin, bitcoin does not equals to blockchain but the underlying technology behind bitcoin is blockchain. Although what I am proposing here is not bitcoin blockchain but consortium blockchain. The difference lies in the fact that anyone can take part in bitcoin blockchain and solve the proof of work but in consortium blockchain, the nodes participating in the blockchain are pre-determined and the consensus algorithm is different.
Last fiscal 2073/74 year Nepal imported food worth 196 billions NRs and this year also so far we have already imported food stuffs worth 105 billions NRs. Our exports compared to that is dismal. Our main exports are high value agriculture crops like coffee, cardamom, ginger, tea etc. our supply chain is very inefficient and is plagued by so many problems. Blockchain technology could be a hammer to these plaguing issues.
The theoretical framework I am proposing has following nodes: Cooperatives, Transporters, Customs/Government, Bulk Importer. Farmers have all kinds of plantation and cultivation data like date of plantation, ph, latitude, altitude, variety, fertilizer use, doses etc. farmers themself cannot take part directly on the blockchain as it would not make sense economically. What they can do is bring their products to cooperatives where those cooperatives could code those data in the form of QR codes and upload any relevant documents on to the blockchain. Our Nepali agriculture products hardly have any brands, cooperatives could create such a brand and bring uniformity in farmer’s produce. They supply the produce themselves or through transporters/middlemen who upload time stamps on to the blockchain. These nows reaches to customs which performs required biological and phyto-sanitary tests and code those information in form of QR codes or any scan able tags. They also upload any relevant documents on the blockchain. Finally the importers and buyers could track the source of food and the way in which it was produced.
Benefits of this technology would be:
a. Supply chain & International Trade:
Blockchain is based on a shared ledger which is updated in real time and requires validation from each network participant (Gro-intelligence, 2017). It enables equal visibility of activities and reveals where an asset is at any point in time, who owns it and what condition it’s in. Researchers have pointed out that one of the main reasons farmers getting marginalized is due to the presence of inefficient supply chain. Inefficient marketing service in agriculture sector is another problem where farmers are getting low price while the consumers are paying high price. The marketing margin is higher in the farm to wholesale market as compared to the wholesale to retail market (Shrestha, 2012)This inefficiency erodes the bargaining power of farmers and middle men, necessary evil, take the major chunk of the profits. Introduction of blockchain however should not be understood as a targeted blow on middlemen, it is rather an opportunity for all genuine marker players to turn their business more efficient.
While mobile payment and blockchain technology international trade will be possible even for a small rural farmer. It will open up new markets for Nepalese agriculture and extra incentives for farmers to raise their quality and scale. Blockchain provides a distributed digital record that does not require a trusted intermediary between firms, it enables for secure, rapid transactions to occur, even across borders” and thereby facilitates international trade. The adoption of blockchain would especially benefit importers and exporters, granting them access to the financial backing that many now lack. (Liao R, 2017)
b. Access to Credit, Liquidity and Remittance:
The number of banks has risen over the years but the banks consider rural small-holder farmers as risk and instead release loans for real estate (Suman, 2017).There are 16,127,006 deposits account out of which 12,375,072 in commercial banks, 3,205,568 in development banks and 546,366 in financial institutions. The number of mobile banking customers is 1,589,266 and 476,213 internet banking customers (Nepali telecom, 2017). Access to credit from these institutions still is a tedious bureaucratic hassle however the number of saving accounts increment as well as increased use of mobile banking signal towards a different story. There are around 1.5 lakh subscribers using eSewa in mobile applications whereas 8 lakh people use their web payment portal (Nepali telecom, 2017). However it needs to be pointed that esewa payment adoption has been more in Kathmandu than other parts of Nepal. The contribution of remittance to national GDP is increasing each year and has become more than 30% of National GDP Remittance from diaspora into agricultural areas in developing countries is four times the global overseas development funding for agriculture provided by donor countries and similar is the case for Nepal. This has occurred in spite of the expensive fee constructs that traditional money transfer charge and time lag of traditional money transfer organizations. Using blockchain remittance payments into mobile money to reach directly into rural areas will enhance and transfer the value proposition for mobile money, enhance the efficiency of the entire commercial agricultural process. Traditional money transfer organizations (e.g. Western Union, MoneyGram) charge fees of 10% or more and taking days to clear. Blockchain technology can do the same work within minutes and save lot of money (Nepal Remitters Association(NRA), 2017). This high cost of remittance has made Nepalese diaspora abroad to use informal channel for sending money back home and use Hundi.
Farmers have assets like standing crops, livestock but they can hardly use that as collateral to gain credit in traditional financial institutions. Absence of network for transfer of rights of these assets prevents these assets from gain liquidity. Blockchain enables does the job of verification and transfer making those assets liquid. (Chinaka M, 2014)
c. Certification of Products:
Certification of production technology mainly organic products in Nepal is a long, expensive process. Many farmers of Nepal are producing organic products but their label isn’t organic, the cost of organic certification and bureaucratic barrier makes it extremely hard for farmers to do so. Blockchain can help certify those products with immutable transparent data from farm to table (Redmann, Blockchain will transform the Agriculture, 2016). Blockchain enables farmers and actors of value chain to justify pricing of commodity based on their qualities as consumer are given information about source of food and the nature in which it was produced. Landholdings, micro insurance.
The underlying constraints are:
Blockchain could likely revolutionize agriculture and many other sector however it is still in early phase and its stability has been questioned at times, the understanding of technology in itself isn’t huge and the high speed internet infrastructure in developing nations where it could be of most profound impact is missing. It has been argued that there are already plenty of solutions for supply chain management and blockchain is a solution looking for “a problem” (Gro-intelligence, 2017). There is a real chance that blockchain’s potential has been overhyped. In the case of trade finance, however, it might just be a tool that could make global markets more accessible at a moment when they seem to be closing off.” (Liao R, 2017)
a. Legality and Bureaucracy
Bitcoin and blockchain technology is currently banned in Nepal. “Bitcoin is illegal in Nepal.” (Acharya K.P., 2017). According to Central Bank of Nepal, the reason for ban is that it is not able to track the transaction and is a high risk for going outward remittance for buying bitcoins than inward remittance. 7 people in Chitwan and Kathmandu have been recently arrested for transaction in bitcoins (Redmann, Bitcoin illegal in Nepal? Police Arrests seven for trading in bitcoin, 2017)Nepal government will miss a trick if they do not soon realize the possibilities blockchain offers instead of viewing it as a threat and should formulate regulation and policy to support growth of blockchain technology and foster innovation.
Legislation of blockchain technology has been increasing throughout the world while Nepal has banned it. Lobbying of people who believe their business will be disrupted might use their influence to stop this technology from use in Nepal. Nepal is the 131 least corrupt nations out of 175 countries, according to the 2016 Corruption Perceptions Index reported by Transparency International. Even after legalization, the procedure filled-regulating tendencies of Nepal government could impede it from attaining desired results. Nepal ranks 107 with respect to ease of doing business in World Bank’s Doing Business Report. (World Bank, 2017)
b. Education level and Trust
Adult literacy was 59.63 % in 2011; internet literacy (ability to perform basic transactions, activities through internet) is even lower. However the youth literacy (age 15–24) was 84.76 % shows the young generation is going to be ready for the technology. (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics, 2011) Knowledge gaps could hinder acceptance and use of blockchain technology. The role of widely networked DADO office and service center in disseminating information, skill could be a way forward. Adoption of blockchain requires trust and farmers and supply chain players who do not understand its intricacies may not trust the technology. The technology due to their unfamiliarity might intimidate them, increase reluctance for adoption. Adoption by all stakeholders is a challenge- middleman and players getting large chunk of profits in current inefficient system are unlikely to let go of their super normal profits without resistance. As blockchain ledger requires participation of all involved parties, lack of trust of one party will stop from the technology being adopted.
c. Internet Infrastructure
Nepal has made leaps and bound progress in adoption and use of smartphones and internet access. The number of smartphones is increasing both in rural areas and cities. While these ICTs have relayed information and have empowered them many folds, their lives in true sense has not been transformed and this all could change through blockchain technology in not so far future. The broadband penetration has reached 28 % population and given that there is huge incentives for internet service providers to expand, this is expected to grow at similar high rates. There are 14.18 million internet subscribers in the country, or nearly 56 percent of the national population of 26.49 million. There are 7000000 subscribers of WCDMA, HSPA (3G, 200000 users of EVDO, 80,000 customers of ADSL, 16,000 customers of wimax, 200,000 private ISP (Nepali telecom, 2017). Widespread blockchain adoption requires access to a fast reliable internet connection, which at present is a question mark for rural Nepali farmers and farmers of the developing world. Broadband still is far from rural farmers. The speed needs to go up and costs need to go down. Increasing number of smartphones in rural household with ever expanding 3G/4G network is a positive sign.
d. Security
Security arguably is the biggest hurdle for blockchain like an individual losing a private key and that key falling in hands of hackers threatens the security of the entire chain. Blockchain is considered safe and “unhackable,” the same can’t be said for the systems developed around the technology. Security breaches in bitcoin exchanges and, more recently, in Ethereum exchanges have led to hundreds of millions of dollars in losses (Gro-intelligence, 2017). Also any device involved in the blockchain is a potential link to vulnerability. Weak passwords and a poor network structure can become easy targets to hackers looking for ransom.
Global Evidences from blockchain technology in Agriculture
Blockchain technology has evolved in terms of perception, understanding and use. Digital currencies have started to set a foothold in the economy of many countries not as a replacement to traditional currency but as an additional means of getting things done (Novoseltseva, 2017). Its acceptance at individual, community and government level has accelerated. Global blockchain market is expected to be worth in $20 billion in 2024. Average investment of $1 million is already recorded in blockchain projects. IBM is investing $200 million in blockchain powered projects allocating 1000 of its employees in these projects. 90 % of European and North American banks are exploring block chain and 90 % agree that blockchain is a banking disruptor (Expanded Ramblings, 2017).
Value of blockchain based crypto currency bitcoin since its beginning up to now has been volatile. In January 2009, it has basically no value. In April 2011 a bitcoin equaled 1 dollar, which reached to $13 in December 2011, $266 in April 2013, $750–1000 in January 2014, $200–300 in July 2015, $600–630 in July 2016, $800–1150 in January 2017, and $4332 in 30 September 2017 (History of bitcoin). There already are entrepreneurs devising solution to agriculture related problem based on this technology, so the evidence and data is out there for users, entrepreneurs and government to see.
Filament, an IOT startup has created a platform where users connect physical objects and existing networks into “wider networks and applications” — making smart farm technology into reliable infrastructure. Smart farming using blockchain technology can broadcast tamper-resistant weather data, SMS alerts, machinery protocol, GPS positioning and tether many more precision agriculture-related platforms. (Redmann, Blockchain will transform the Agriculture, 2016)
Skuchain is trying to make the agriculture supply chain efficient and cost effective. . SkuChain’s technology is focusing on creating direct relationships while augmenting trust and visibility into the flow of goods. ( (Redmann, Blockchain will transform the Agriculture, 2016)
Provenance, another startup based on blockchain system tracks goods (food) and makes the information public, secure and all-inclusive. The startup says its state-of-the-art monitoring tools can “prove authenticity and guarantee quality.” Provenance software service has enabled businesses to comply with legislation and consumer demands which will create a “positive social and environmental impact.” (Baker, 2017)
BitPesa in East Africa and Rebit in the Philippines are using the blockchain to help transfer remittances for fees of 3% or less with near-immediate transfer while traditional money transfer organizations (e.g. Western Union, MoneyGram) charging fees of 10% or more and taking days to clear. BitPesa raised $1.1M USD in their second round from a roster of venture capital funds which shows where the industry is headed. (Weston & Nolet, 2016)
Tierra Buena, another organization in Argentina, is helping farmers sell their goods online to bitcoin shoppers. Organic farmer Santiago Zaz told NPR bitcoin accounted for around 10 percent of sales in 2013. When mobile money transfer is connected with blockchain, bitcoin and international trade becomes accessible to small and large scale farmers across the world.
To conclude, Blockchain could transform the way we agriculture, but that outcome at the moment is very much in the future. As Population pressure makes food security a threat to mankind’s survival blockchain based solution are likely to be the solution/ part of solution. As pointed out earlier, farmers in rural Nepal might benefit the most from blockchain; they also may face the most difficulty adopting it. Unreliable slow connectivity, obsolete technology, and knowledge gaps could impede implementation of blockchain. Finding flexibility, educating farmers and stakeholders and further innovation in making it accessible and stable will enhance the rate at it which the technology will be adopted.
Prashant Bhandari giving poster presentation on blockchain technology
Rachel Carson on her acclaimed book raised a fundamental question, “How can intelligent beings seek to control a few unwanted species by a method that contaminates the entire environment and brings the threat of disease and death even to our own kind?” A lot has changed since her time, but, have they really? In our national case, official targets include attaining food self-sufficiency without a clear mention of how agro-biodiversity integrates in such schemes. Haphazard use of imported varieties, pesticide use, broad spectrum pesticides etc. are prevalent throughout the country. There are very few cases, like the one in vegetable producing farmers from Charaudi which this essay will discuss about, where farmers themselves have taken on the onus to adopt a sustainable production system, with troubling results sadly.
Agricultural biodiversity is an umbrella term which encompasses all biological diversity pertaining to food and agriculture ecosystems viz. plants, animals, micro-organisms. Four dimensions of agricultural biodiversity have been identified by CBD, namely, genetic resources for food and agriculture, components of biodiversity that support ecosystem services, abiotic factors and socio-economic and cultural dimension.
The main challenge in agricultural biodiversity is to sustain its ecosystem services, which it requires and provides, while mitigating the negative impacts of human agricultural interventions on biodiversity. This challenge becomes much nuanced when one factors in demography, economy, climate change, poverty, and land-use.
One of the four suggestions put forward by CBD programme of work on agricultural biodiversity (decision V/5, annex) states that assessing the status and trends of the world’s agricultural biodiversity, the underlying causes of change, and knowledge of management practices is a realistic solution.
My research site, Charaudi, Dhading district which is a commercial hub for vegetable production accounting for bulk of vegetables in market like Kalimati and Pokhara, has been at a back drop of concerns regarding pesticide use. Farmers here identified the cause as excessive use of pesticides and to counter that adopted a policy to use “herbera”- a natural insect repellent which leaves no residue. This expensive anti-dote was adopted with half subsidy from Benighat Rorang rural municipality.
Figure 1 Field observation for disease diagnosis and sample collection
Zone implementation unit (Vegetable-Zone, Dhading), PMAMP where I am working as a research intern ventured to assess perception of people regarding herbera and its efficacy in the field. Sixty households which had only used herbera and avoided use of any other pesticides were visited where semi-structured interview followed by disease/pest field observation, samples of diseases/damage were collected and taken to laboratory for diagnosis.
In spite of the clear label, almost all of the farmers didn’t know that “herbera” was only an insect repellent and a growth promoter that could not counter viral, fungal and bacterial diseases. It could minimize the vectors-insects which transport these diseases but clearly not a complete management solution. Field inspection showed incidence of soil borne fungus in brinjal, viral diseases like mosaic in cucumber, mites in capsicum, powdery and downy mildew in cucurbits.
Figure 2 Data Collection regarding pesticide use, herbera use and household survey
The cooperatives where all these farmers sell their products had whipped them to use this product and the farmers abided then, but now, amidst farmers, a lot of discontent voices could be heard . Few of our respondent even mentioned that his neighbors had started spraying other pesticides at night and he might do the same if the diseases aggravate. When the leaders of the cooperatives were asked for their reasons for herbera adoption and promotion, it was clear that it was driven partly by the negative feedback from the market, partly by their own firsthand experience of seeing effects of pesticides on crops and soil and predominantly by reminiscence of the by gone days when farming without all these chemicals brought them not just income but fulfillment and joy.
This case shows us that simply a desire to make vegetable production sustainable and maintain agro-biodiversity is not enough. Multi-stake holder engagement with direct participation of local governing body (rural municipality), local community organization, farmers, bio products manufacturer couldn’t tackle the situation rather further hindered future adoption of such technology.
Clearly, a smaller trial in a field with several varied treatments like herbera alone, combinations of different doses of other pesticides along with herbera had to be conducted before randomly whipping farmers to adopt a certain green technology. The efforts to understand farmers’ perceptions and wishes had not been definitively studied. Neither was the forward linkage for marketing of their pesticide-less product constructed, meaning they would not be priced differently at all.
Research based decisions, design thinking and human centered solutions could very well hold the key to tackling complex challenges like increasing food production while maintain agro-biodiversity. The fear is, unplanned interventions like these may have caused irreversible damage.
Zone Implementation unit (vegetable zone), Dhading on the
date of 2018/04/10 organized a market promotion workshop at conference hall of
Krishak Sudhar fruit and vegetable cooperatives, Charaudi. The target groups of
this workshop were the committee members and sub-committee members of the
recently formed zone implementation committee. The objectives was to identify
the underlying constraints and challenges in the vegetable markets, marketing
and then to create discussion within the participants, with the facilitation of
experts, to locate the immediate and long term potential solutions.
The program was scheduled in three distinct segments. The
first segment was felicitation of the newly formed zone implementation
committee, welcoming subject matter specialist Mr. Subash Shrestha and chief
administrative officer Mr. Sameer Singh Magar.
The second session included paper presentation from Mr. Ramhari
Timilsina, representative from central agriculture commodity marketing board,
Mr. Binod Lamichhane, representative from District Agriculture Development
Office (DADO), Gorkha; Mr. Keshav Raj Kafle, senior agriculture development
officer of vegetable zone Dhading and Mr. Nilkantha Paudel, agriculture
technician at Benighat Rorang Rural Municipality.
Mr. Timilsina brought attention towards the increasing
agriculture imports and decreasing exports. He stated that the farmers’ union
was not strong enough to influence major national policy and market structures.
The market power of middlemen is increasing disproportionately. He also said
that farmers not being updated about current market prices, changes in the
market.
Mr. Lamichhane started his presentation stating the
tremendous opportunity this vegetable zone brings with it. He made an appeal to
utilize this opportunity and achieve the aim of agriculture commercialization
and industrilaisation put forward by Prime Minister Agriculture Modernization Project
(PMAMP). He advised the need to upgrade nursery, product specialization,
exploring off seasons production further. He said that profit based marketing
strategy should be our aim and the need to use social media and internet of
things to promote their products and draw useful insights. He refereed program
planning and strategic marketing as the need of our times.
Mr. Kafle stated his presentation with the concepts of
markets, types of markets, features of marketing, the various aspects of
marketing and the strategic tools that could be used in marketing like product
diversification, market expansion, developing new products etc. He made a
strong case for need to cooperate in achieving mutual goals so that the blind
spots of each involved stakeholder be it cooperatives, farmers, vegetable zone,
local governing bodies. He used didactic short stories to relay his message.
Mr. Paudel talked about the haphazard nature of Nepalese
agriculture markets and the inefficient, long supply chain. He talked about 8 %
commission system being implemented in Chitwan markets where farmer bring their
products to markets, middlemen sell them at retail prices and they keep 8% of
total sales and give rest of the money to farmers. He talked about the corrupt,
syndicate system that has been plaguing Nepalese agriculture markets and
barring farmers and cooperatives to have access in such spaces. A case of Kalimati
was brought where farmer’s groups/cooperatives get very few stalls which forces
farmers to sell to middlemen instead of selling it themselves.He discussed about the increasing consumer
awareness and the increasing demand of high quality food stuffs. He emphasized
on the need to decrease costs of cultivation and costs of marketing.
After these series of presentation, three groups were formed
and each group was allocated a topic to brainstorm about the root causes,
possible solutions and relevant stakeholders. The groups were market oriented
production process, transportation and commercialization.
Group 1: Market Oriented Production process
Problems
ØNo study regarding real market/customer wants
ØLack of information or information dissemination
ØLack of technical knowledge and expertise
ØLimited access of farmers to wholesale markets
ØDelayed, inadequate availability of production
inputs
Group 2: Transportation of agricultural commodity
Problems
ØSeasonal, muddy roads where only limited vehicles
can go
ØCost of transportation is higher
ØOnce the commodity has been brought for sale,
they cannot be taken back or stored which decreases farmer’s bargaining power
ØExpensive vehicles which farmers/cooperatives
cannot afford to buy themselves
Group 3: Commercialization
Problems
ØImbalanced market power between producers and
middlemen
ØProduct differentiation according to quality is
lacking
ØCurrent status of local, regional and national
markets do not favor farmer
After these presentations, concluding remarks were given by
chairman of the program Mr. Hemnath Thapaliya, chairman of the Krishak Sudhar
Vegetables and Fruits Cooperative and also chairman of the recently formed zone
implementation committee.
Vegetable zone implementation unit, Dhading, PMAMP organized
one day training on “Vegetable Production Technology” at Bishalatar on
2074/09/29 and at Salanghat on 2074/09/30. After a short formal session and orientation
about the vision of the project, problem identification exercise was
facilitated by Mr. Shiva Prashad Rijal, where farmers actively pitched in their
felt problems. Mr. Ramesh subedi also interacted with farmers and answered
their queries. This was followed by presentation on “Vegetable production in
tunnel house” by Mr. Nilkantha subedi. And then I, Prashant Bhandari gave a
presentation on “Drip irrigation, Precision agriculture- the way forward?”
The program was marked by lively discussions and healthy exchange of ideas.
