Can AI Transform the Future of Indian Agriculture?

Artificial intelligence is beginning to change how farms are managed, but the shift is unfolding differently in the United States and India. Research on farming in the US and other regions shows farmers are already experimenting with generative AI for planning, information and everyday decisions.

In India, the bigger challenge is ensuring that agricultural AI can work for farmers across different languages, farm sizes, crops, income levels and levels of digital access.

Proposal for Conducting Cyber Crisis Drill, Tabletop Exercise (TTEx) & CCMP Readiness Exercise

How Fast Are Farmers Adopting AI?

Generative AI is emerging as a fast-growing agricultural technology. The research shows that about 17 per cent of farmers globally now use generative AI for farm-related tasks.

Adoption is considerably higher in the Americas. Around 26 per cent of farmers covered by the research in Latin America use generative AI, while the figure for North America stands at 23 per cent. Europe is at 13 per cent and Asia at 7 per cent.

The figures show that agricultural AI is not developing at the same speed everywhere. Farmers in some regions have already started incorporating AI into routine work, while adoption remains at an earlier stage elsewhere.

The technology is also arriving at a difficult time for agriculture. Farmers have faced pressure from costs associated with labour, land, equipment, financing and fertiliser. Unpredictable weather and labour shortages can make decisions at farm level more difficult.

Against this background, AI is being explored as another tool that can help farmers process information and make decisions more efficiently.

What Are US Farmers Using AI For?

The use of AI on farms is not limited to highly technical operations. Farmers can use generative AI to gather and compare information, support planning and assist with everyday decisions.

The research suggests that strategic planning is becoming an important area of interest. In a US agricultural survey cited in the material, more than 30 per cent of respondents identified strategic planning as the biggest benefit of AI.

This is significant because farming involves decisions that extend far beyond what happens in a field on a particular day. Producers must plan how they use resources, control costs and manage their businesses under changing conditions.

AI can make it easier to organise and compare large amounts of information. Instead of treating it as a replacement for agricultural knowledge, farmers can use it as another layer of support when considering their options.

The research also suggests that adoption could increase as farmers become more familiar with what the technology can and cannot do.

Are Farmers Paying for AI Tools?

The numbers reveal an important difference between trying AI and spending money on it.

Globally, about 17 per cent of surveyed farmers use generative AI for agricultural tasks, but only 4 per cent pay for AI tools. Around 12 per cent use free versions, with rounding accounting for the difference in the overall figure.

North America stands out. Around 23 per cent of surveyed farmers there report using generative AI. Of these, 10 per cent pay for tools while 13 per cent use free options.

In Latin America, adoption is even higher at 26 per cent, although most of the reported use comes from free tools. Europe records overall adoption of 13 per cent, while Asia stands at 7 per cent.

This pattern indicates that low-cost or free access can make experimentation easier. Farmers may be more willing to test an AI service when doing so does not require a large investment in equipment or other infrastructure.

It also shows why overall adoption figures need to be read carefully. A farmer experimenting with a free generative AI service represents a different level of adoption from a farm paying for specialised technology and integrating it into regular operations.

Can AI Replace Agricultural Experts?

The research gives little indication that farmers are ready to replace human agricultural expertise with chatbots.

Only 6 per cent of surveyed farmers globally cited generative AI chatbots as a source of advice. By comparison, 56 per cent turned to technical agronomists and 56 per cent relied on sales representatives.

That gap is important. Farmers may be prepared to use AI to discover information, compare alternatives or help organise a decision, but they continue to place considerable importance on people with specialist knowledge.

This points towards a hybrid model of agricultural decision-making. AI can help farmers find and process information, while trusted agricultural experts remain important when that information has to be interpreted and applied to real farms.

The distinction matters because an incorrect agricultural decision can carry financial consequences. Farmers may therefore use AI as an initial source of information without treating its response as the final answer.

Why Is India’s AI Challenge Different?

India presents a much more complex environment for agricultural AI because of the enormous diversity of its farming system.

The India-focused material argues for a human and farmer-centred model of agricultural AI. Instead of expecting farmers to adjust themselves to a technology, AI systems need to be developed around farmers’ actual requirements.

A single approach is unlikely to work equally well everywhere. Agricultural conditions can vary according to location, crop, farm size, access to irrigation and infrastructure, economic circumstances and other local factors.

Farmers also differ in their ability to access and use digital technology. A sophisticated AI platform may have limited practical value if the intended user lacks reliable connectivity, cannot easily interact with it or receives information in a form that is difficult to understand.

This means the effectiveness of agricultural AI in India cannot be measured simply by the number of AI products available. The more important question is whether those systems solve genuine farming problems and can be used under real conditions.

Could AI Create a New Divide in Indian Farming?

The India-focused research warns of an AI divide in Indian agriculture.

Digital technology does not reach every farmer in the same way. Differences in connectivity, devices, digital familiarity, language and access to information can affect who is able to benefit from AI-based agricultural services.

If those differences are ignored, farmers who already have better digital access may be in a stronger position to take advantage of new technologies, while others could struggle to participate.

Language is particularly important in a country with enormous linguistic diversity. Agricultural advice becomes useful only when a farmer can understand it and relate it to local circumstances.

Digital literacy is another part of the challenge. Giving someone access to an AI tool does not automatically mean that the person can judge the quality of its output. Farmers need to know what information can be trusted, when additional advice is necessary and how recommendations relate to conditions on their own farms.

The research therefore points towards the need for inclusive agricultural AI that accounts for different users rather than assuming that every farmer has the same digital skills, resources and requirements.

Why Must Agricultural AI Understand Local Conditions?

Agriculture is deeply dependent on local conditions, making context particularly important for AI.

A recommendation that is useful for one farmer may not necessarily work for another. Crops, soil, weather, water availability, farm size, agricultural practices and access to resources can differ considerably.

For that reason, agricultural AI needs relevant information if it is expected to provide useful support. Generic recommendations may fail to capture the conditions under which an individual farmer is actually working.

The India-focused material places importance on systems that combine technology with agricultural knowledge and farmer participation. Farmers should not simply be treated as the final recipients of technology. Their experience can help determine what problems need to be solved and whether a proposed system is practical.

Trust also becomes crucial. Farmers are more likely to use a system when its recommendations are understandable and when they can see how the information relates to their own situation.

Human support therefore remains important. AI may expand access to information, but local knowledge and agricultural expertise are still needed to interpret recommendations and identify situations in which automated advice may not be appropriate.

What Will AI Farming Look Like in the US and India?

The two sets of research show agriculture moving towards greater use of artificial intelligence, but from very different starting points.

In the US, the transition is already visible in the growing use of generative AI. Farmers are experimenting with AI for everyday decisions and strategic planning, and free tools appear to be making that experimentation easier. At the same time, the low reliance on AI chatbots for agricultural advice shows that farmers have not abandoned human expertise.

India faces a broader task. Agricultural AI has to operate across a farming system marked by differences in language, digital access, resources and local conditions. Simply making an AI system available will not guarantee that farmers can benefit from it.

The common lesson is that the future of farming is unlikely to be a choice between people and artificial intelligence. AI can make information easier to find, compare and use, but agricultural knowledge, local experience and human judgement remain central to important farming decisions.

The US experience demonstrates how quickly farmers can begin experimenting when AI tools are easily accessible. India’s experience highlights the next and more difficult question: how to make those technologies useful to farmers with very different needs and circumstances.

For agriculture, the real measure of AI will therefore not be how advanced the technology becomes or how many tools reach the market. It will be whether farmers can use those systems to make clearer, better-informed decisions without losing the human expertise and local knowledge on which farming continues to depend.

The Future of Farming Will Be AI-Assisted, Not AI-Run

The message for farmers is simple: AI can make agricultural information faster to access and decisions easier to compare, but it cannot replace experience on the ground. From US farms experimenting with generative AI to India developing farmer-centred solutions, the most effective future will combine technology with local knowledge and human expertise.

About the author — Ayesha Aayat writes on cybercrime, digital safety, and emerging online threats. Her work focuses on public awareness, legal clarity, and technology-driven risks.