PowerPoint Presentation

[Audio] Now, it's time for Module 6, titled 'Legal, Risk, and Ethical Considerations.' In this module, we shift our focus from the technologies themselves to the frameworks that determine whether those technologies can be implemented responsibly, sustainably, and at scale. What we'll explore here are the fundamental questions that shape any investment or development decision in digital agriculture: Are we legally protected? Are we ethically grounded? And are we fully aware of the risks involved? We'll break this down into three key areas. First, the legal considerations that ensure compliance with IP rights, data protection laws, and regulatory standards. Second, the ethical dimension, which challenges us to think about equity, transparency, and environmental responsibility. And finally, we'll look at the risks, both financial and technological, that investors and stakeholders must account for. So let's move into Module 6, where we explore how these three elements come together to shape safe and responsible funding in digital agriculture..

[Audio] "On this slide, we focus on the key legal considerations that shape funding strategies in digital agriculture. When we talk about legal issues, we're essentially referring to the foundations that make a digital agriculture project valid, compliant, and safe for all stakeholders involved." "First, let's look at Intellectual Property, or IP. Digital agriculture solutions often rely on innovative software platforms, algorithms, and increasingly complex hardware systems. Because these assets are proprietary, we need to ensure that ownership is clearly defined from the outset. Unclear ownership is one of the most common causes of disputes between developers, investors, and end users. So when funding a project, we should make sure that the contract defines who owns what—whether that's the code, the data, or the resulting technologies." "Closely connected to this is licensing. Licensing agreements explain how the technology can be used, who can use it, and under what conditions. This needs to be explicit, especially when third-party tools or datasets are involved. Funding without a clear licensing framework can create major roadblocks later on—particularly when scaling a project or commercializing the output." "Finally, we need to think about the implications of using open-source versus proprietary systems. Open-source tools offer transparency and flexibility, but they can also come with restrictions that affect commercialization. Investors need to understand whether the tools being used can legally be monetized and whether future developments must remain open. Again, misunderstanding open-source licenses is a frequent legal pitfall." "Next, let's turn to data privacy, which is becoming one of the defining legal issues in digital agriculture. Digital platforms collect highly sensitive information—such as soil health metrics, crop yields, and farm management patterns. Farmers' data rights must be protected in full compliance with laws like the GDPR in Europe or the CCPA in the United States." "For investors, this means that any funded project must have robust data management policies: How is the data stored? Who has access to it? Can it be shared with third parties? And crucially, do farmers have clear consent and control over how their data is used?" "Another challenge is cross-border data transfer. Many digital agriculture platforms operate globally, so data often moves between jurisdictions. Investors need to understand international data-transfer restrictions and ensure that their systems comply with them. Non-compliance can lead not only to legal penalties but also to serious trust issues with farmers." "Finally, we need to think about broader regulatory frameworks. Agriculture is one of the most regulated sectors in the world. Investments must account for environmental, water-use, and pesticide regulations—whichN vary widely across regions. A project might be technologically sound but still fail if it doesn't meet agricultural safety or environmental impact standards." "Technology-specific regulations also matter. For example, drones require aviation licensing. AI decision-making tools may require software certification to ensure fairness and transparency. Autonomous machinery must comply with machinery-safety laws. Failing to meet these requirements can stop deployment altogether." "So overall, the legal considerations ensure that our investments are protected, compliant, and ready for long-term scalability.".

[Audio] Now, let's look at risk considerations. Risk is central to any investment decision, and digital agriculture presents a unique combination of financial, technological, legal, and reputational risks." "Digital agriculture projects often require significant capital. Technologies like sensor networks, drones, and AI platforms come with high upfront costs. Returns can be uncertain, especially in early stages when adoption rates are still developing." "Another challenge is market volatility. Agriculture is tightly connected to unpredictable commodity prices and climate conditions. Extreme weather can disrupt production and reduce the economic viability of a digital agriculture investment. So investors must build financial models that account for uncertainty and delayed returns." "Next, we face technological risks. IoT devices can fail, drones can malfunction, and platforms can face outages or cyberattacks. These disruptions can lead to operational downtime and economic loss for farmers and investors alike." "We also need to consider technology obsolescence. Digital agriculture evolves rapidly, and a tool that is cutting-edge today may become outdated in two or three years. Investors should plan for continual updates, scalability, and long-term technological flexibility." "Legal risks are tied to compliance. If a project violates data protection rules or agricultural regulations, it can lead to fines and legal disputes. This is why having compliance frameworks from the earliest funding stage is essential." "Reputational risks are equally important. Data breaches, misuse of farmers' information, or unethical deployment can damage trust. Farmers place enormous trust in digital systems, and once that trust is broken, it is difficult to rebuild." "Finally, stakeholder backlash is a growing concern. Projects that ignore community needs or present misleading sustainability claims can face public criticism and long-term reputational harm. Transparency and responsible practice are key to maintaining credibility.".

[Audio] Moving on, we now look at the ethical considerations that should guide sustainable and responsible funding in digital agriculture. Even when a project is legally compliant, it may still raise ethical concerns—particularly regarding equity, transparency, and environmental responsibility." "Digital agriculture has tremendous potential, but it also risks widening existing inequalities. Ethical funding strategies must prioritize smallholder and marginalized farmers, who often lack access to advanced technologies. If investments only target large, well-resourced farms, we risk creating a deeper digital divide. So, we have a responsibility to ensure that the benefits of technology—better forecasting, precision tools, AI insights—are available to all farmers, not just a privileged subset." "Equitable access to technology is also crucial. This means funding training, infrastructure, and support so that less technologically experienced farmers can still make meaningful use of digital tools. Ethical investment isn't just about deploying technology—it's about ensuring everyone can actually use it." "Another ethical priority is transparency. Modern agricultural tools increasingly rely on algorithms and AI models that make recommendations about irrigation, fertilization, pest control, and more. Farmers need to understand how these decisions are generated. They must know what data was used and whether the model has limitations or biases." "Accountability also extends to investors. We must be clear about our intentions—whether the primary focus is profit, social impact, or both. Misleading promises can create distrust, and ethical funding means maintaining open communication about goals, expectations, and responsibilities." "Finally, ethical funding requires a commitment to environmental sustainability. We should prioritize technologies that genuinely improve soil health, reduce chemical usage, and support long-term ecological balance." "However, we also need to guard against greenwashing. As the literature on ethical challenges in digital agriculture points out, some projects present themselves as environmentally beneficial without real evidence. Ethical investors must critically assess such claims and verify that sustainability benefits are measurable and meaningful." "In essence, ethics ensures that our investments do more than generate returns—they contribute to fair access, transparent practices, and environmental stewardship.".

thank you!. TALLHEDA has received funding from the European Union's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No. 101136578. Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Executive Agency (REA). Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them..