My observations on the Asian agritech and foodtech landscape as a VC

Photo credit: Pixabay.

When I decided to focus my VC investment on Asia Pacific from Singapore, there was not much market intelligence supporting my belief that there were great innovations in the region. If the agtech/foodtech VC vertical is quite small in Western countries, it is literally under the radar in Asia.

Now, we are 18 months in. Our Future Food Asia Award (FFAA) has gotten great traction in more than 12 countries. It is also supported by Startup SG, an initiative of SPRING Singapore. Even if it is just the beginning of the journey, we have gathered a unique knowledge of who these “agripreneurs” (agriculture entrepreneurs) are and the context they evolve in.

What makes them different from their Western peers? General statements are over-simplistic but a couple of recurring observations can be worth sharing.

Disregard language barrier

Language is the first obvious “uncommon denominator,” with notable exceptions like Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and India. And across the board, it is more than a question of English fluency. The dominance of the US and Silicon Valley in particular have given life to a very specific jargon, which allows us to communicate quite efficiently between startups, MNCs, and investors. “Silicon Valley English” has become the norm.

But there’s nothing like this in Asia! We receive pitch decks that are more like manifestos; they can be almost lyrical about their vision for the future of food. And you should look into them with different lenses, unless you are ready to limit yourself to young, well-traveled entrepreneurs with an MBA from the US or the UK. We didn’t want to do this because we deal with agriculture and food, and these domains are very contingent in a place, country, and culture.

It requires a lot of grassroots experience to not only imagine new devices, processes, ways of running otherwise traditional operations like a dairy supply chain and fish farming but also market these innovations.

But then, how do you form an opinion of these entrepreneurs? Of course, it requires an effort for us investors, juries, and corporate executives to dump our cultural baggage. It’s about understanding why entrepreneurs have decided to undertake this journey—their inner, social, and economic drivers and the context they are living in.

Cultural gaps also sometimes generate the most enduring relationships. I recall an entrepreneur in Thailand who said he believed his proposition would be much more trusted if he were not Thai. There’s another one in Korea who asked his best friend, a fluent English speaker, to attend our meeting (with just few hours’ notice) to make the best of our discussion.

Let’s not miss diamonds in the rough out of sheer cultural myopia.

The attitude toward entrepreneurship is different

We have covered a wide swathe of Asia Pacific and met hundreds of people. The entrepreneurial fabric and the social values underpinning the innovation ecosystem are clearly different in Asia.

All countries claim to be willing to foster innovation, but force-fitting does not work. Are all the enablers in place to reach a situation like Israel, to avoid taking once again the US as a role model? (We are touching a sensitive topic here.)

Within the Chinese community, whether in mainland China or overseas, there is a long tradition of family businesses. But fortunes are often made in more traditional sectors like real estate or trading, where cycles are quicker. The idea of burning cash for several years is not ingrained in the business culture. Entrepreneurs also need to prepare to be judged by their family and to fail.

In a very different context, as much as Japan praises technology, entrepreneurship is not a widely accepted route for young professionals to take.

Low tech and traditional business practices are opportunities

Funding may be different