Tag: Urban farming

From Araku Coffee to lady finger: Can this farming model scale?

admin

August 1, 2026

Murali K Menon, Firstpost
1 August 2026

The next time you are shopping for veggies on a quick commerce app, we’d suggest you hop onto the organic produce section and consider where those vegetables came from. Chances are, they have travelled through a supply chain pretty different from the one that bought veggies to your kitchen just five years ago. Some of that produce is supplied by Urban Farms Co., a little-known company that is rethinking food systems.

Urban Farms works with about 2,000 small farmers on the outskirts of several of India’s cities, as well as in states like Rajasthan and Maharashtra to grow vegetables using regenerative practices and supplies them to urban consumers via quick commerce and modern retail. The definition of renegenrative agriculture changes depending on who you ask, but broadly it refers to an approach that seeks to restore soil health, as opposed to conventional, chemical-intensive farming.

About 1% of global farmland is now under regenerative practices, according to a 2025 World Resources Institute study. Urban Farms, whose farmer network grows over 50 varieties of vegetables, handles around 12,000 tonnes annually and is targeting a twenty-fold jump in revenue from its current Rs 30 crore in the next five years.

That target might sound ambitious until you look at its origins. Urban Farms was founded by members of the team behind Araku Coffee, the specialty coffee brand that put Indian coffee on the global map. Both Araku Coffee and Urban Farms are backed by the Hyderabad-based Naandi Foundation, among the country’s largest, multi-sector non-profits. The NGO was set up by Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories founder, the late Kallam Anji Reddy, and counts Kris Gopalakrishnan and Anand Mahindra on its board.

The broad details of Araku Coffee’s success are well known, but the model that underpins it is much less discussed. Over two decades, the project worked with thousands of tribal farmers to promote regenerative farming practices, restore degraded land, and improve farmer incomes while building a globally recognised premium coffee brand. The same spirit animates Urban Farms. Instead of tribal farmers, it works with small farmers on the outskirts of India’s cities. Instead of a premium export crop, it is betting on everyday vegetables sold through quick commerce and modern retail. But can a model proven in a premium niche survive in the toughest, most commoditised part of Indian agriculture?

Beyond coffee

Coffee was just a conversation-starter, says Manoj Kumar, the lead architect of the Araku Coffee project and the founding CEO of the Naandi Foundation. The developmental economist says that the project proved two things. “It proved at scale that our regenerative organic agricultural science worked for 20 years in every crop, from coffee to millet, consistently season after season, without any drop in yield. And, just as importantly, that we could do world-class excellence at scale with very ordinary poor people.”

The eventual goal was improving farmer economics. “In India, 85% of farmers have less than one hectare of land,” Kumar says. “The question is: what do we do with small and marginal farmers?” Urban Farms is one answer to that question. Unlike Araku Coffee, though, it isn’t built around a single crop.

“Urban Farms is about doing a system change. We are changing food systems,” says Vikash Abraham, the company’s CEO. So, what does that mean for something as everyday as a lady finger? Before it reaches your kitchen, Urban Farms is involved in almost every stage of its journey. It supplies regenerative fertilisers to farmers, works with them through the growing season, buys back their produce, and sells it to retailers and quick commerce platforms.

Urban Farms

“We procure from the farmer at the same price as conventional produce. We do not pay a premium per kilogram because we believe profitability is about cost of cultivation versus the entire income you get from your farm,” Abraham says. In other words, with Urban Farms, farmers don’t earn more because they sell lady finger at a higher price. They earn more because regenerative farming lowers their costs while giving them an assured buyer. A typical vegetable grower could earn as much as Rs 20,000 to Rs 30,000 more per acre annually, says Abraham, with savings increasing over time. A first-season comparison conducted by the company across 56.5 acres in Wardha, Maharashtra, found that soybean yields rose 12% and total cultivation costs fell by 8%.

Spending on farm inputs dipped from ₹9,750 to ₹5,267 per acre, while profits increased from ₹12,550 to ₹19,195. The model does not rely on government subsidies and farmers pay for the inputs themselves. According to Abraham, Urban Farms doesn’t approach farmers from a moral standpoint, or talk about climate change. “We go to them with a business proposition, and the business proposition is about making profitability.”

From trial to habit

Urban Farms’ residue-free vegetables generally cost about 40% more than conventional produce, although the gap varies by crop, market prices, and platforms. Lady finger, for instance, was priced at ₹24 for a 250gm pack on Zepto in Azadpur, in north Delhi, earlier this week compared with ₹17 for conventional produce; on Blinkit, the same pack was sold at ₹35.

Quick commerce accounts for 65% of its business under the residue-free category, with modern trade and other channels making up the rest. Abraham says part of that premium reflects the cost of maintaining a separate, traceable supply chain. The company supplies Blinkit, Zepto, Swiggy, and Flipkart as well as Reliance, Jubilant, and Country Delight, among others.

Devangshu Dutta, founder of retail consultancy Third Eyesight, says that he expects demand to grow, as incomes rise and consumers become more conscious of the food they are eating. But he thinks a 40% premium may be too high for regular consumption because vegetables, unlike coffee or craft chocolate, are staples.

“You could have a premium of maybe 20% to 30%. Some products could be higher than that, but that is something that has to be managed carefully.” For category growth to accelerate, he says, the produce must become “a fixture in the consumer’s pantry, in the consumer’s kitchen, on the consumer’s plate.”

Dutta believes that quick commerce is well-suited to fresh produce because Indian households have traditionally bought vegetables frequently rather than stocking up. “The bottleneck really is having the product range that consumers will buy over a period of time again and again.” That requires farmers growing different crops across regions and climatic zones. And building a wide range of vegetables also means working with farmers and ensuring farmer retention in the system season after season. “You don’t just sign up a farmer and say he’s going to be there forever,” Dutta says.

Urban Farms says it has managed to do that so far. In May this year, Anand Mahindra posted on X that 80 to 90% of the farmers who work with the company return every season. “Not out of loyalty to a movement, but because the economics work,” he wrote, pointing to yields comparable with conventional farming, lower input costs and produce that consistently tests residue-free.

Abraham says that Urban Farms would like to work with about 100,000 farmers by 2030, and the company’s growth will depend on how quickly it can both build and nurture relationships with its partners across the country. Applying the Araku model to a far more unpredictable market won’t be easy, but if Urban Farms can keep both farmers and shoppers in the system as it grows, coffee, as Manoj Kumar said, may indeed have been just the conversation-starter.

(Published in Firstpost)

---

The Team Behind Araku Coffee Wants a Place on Your Plate | The Spend [VIDEO]

admin

August 1, 2026

Two decades ago, the team at the Naandi Foundation turned tribal farmers in a remote Andhra valley into some of the world’s best-paid coffee growers. Araku Coffee now sells in Paris, and the best of it goes for thousands of rupees a kilogram. Now the same team is trying to do it again — this time with everyday vegetables. Their company, Urban Farms Co., works with regenerative farmers and sells their produce on apps like Blinkit and Zepto. The bet is that what worked for premium coffee can work for staples too. But vegetables aren’t coffee. They’re cheap, everyday, and something people buy all the time. Can this really scale, and does it actually leave farmers better off?

---

Ikea Is Working On Urban Farming Products

admin

January 6, 2019

Written By Editor

With this, Ikea is jumping on to the trend of products focused on people farming in an urban environment.

Source: billionfarmers

---

Building the Safety Net

admin

September 22, 2008

Devangshu Dutta

In a departure from popular retail philosophy, Devangshu Dutta calls for a new model of food supply based on multiplicity and diversity. Modern retail must, he says, take into account the changing environment and be sensitive to evolving consumer preferences and to the failures and obsolescence of traditional mass retail models adopted by western developed markets.

Devangshu Dutta is chief executive of Third Eyesight, a management consulting firm focused on consumer products and retail, whose clients include brand leaders and some of the largest companies in their respective markets.

Food price inflation it is still hogging the headlines. It is, after all, an emotive topic. We are terribly concerned not just as food and grocery professionals, but also as consumers and the general public. After all, food and grocery typically account for half of our monthly spend, give or take a few percentage points.

Most students of management, economics, and human behaviour are aware of Abraham Maslow’s classification of human needs into a hierarchy construct. Other economists and psychologists prefer to use other models. Whichever model you consider, the need to eat and the need for security are invariably at the bottom or base level which must be fulfilled the earliest.

The interesting fact is that well after you would imagine these basic concerns have been taken care of, they are actually never far from the surface. This is true not just of the poorest of the poor, but of the wealthy and the well-off as well—whether individuals, communities, or nations.

Increasingly, the agricultural supply chain is dependent on non-renewable petroleum and its products, rather than by the natural energy of the sun being converted into food by the plants.

Is it any wonder that “food security”—the combination of these two—is such a charged subject, especially in these times?

However, a significant set of questions is not really touched in the question of costs and in the question about the continuing security of food supplies: how the food supply chain is structured, how it is driving consumption, what impact that might have on food prices and several broader cost implications.

As farms industrialised, the parameters that began to be applied were the same as in any factory—how to produce more while spending less—and every year the target was to grow more for less. Underlying this was the principle of “efficiency from larger scale”. The same philosophy played out further down in the supply chain – from processing aimed at extending the shelf-life of the product as it was (chilling, cleaning, sorting) to processing and packing in order to change the nature of the product itself and gain additional value (such as turning tomatoes into puree and potatoes into chips).

Standardisation became a vital link in industrialisation — if you can standardise produce, you can cut down human handling — while you may lose product variety (including flavour and colour) you gain through lower production costs. By reducing unpredictability, you can also concentrate on building the scale of business, because it becomes more repetitive.

The interesting side-effect of this is that, gradually, we are converting ourselves (and people in many industrialised economies already have) into petroleum-burning machines rather than those running on solar energy, because increasingly, the agricultural supply chain is dependent on non-renewable petroleum and its products, rather than by the natural energy of the sun being converted into food by the plants.

The important thing to keep in mind is that, in this switch- over, energy efficiency is actually going down rather than up

Energy efficiency is actually going down rather than up – we are using more calories of fuel source to produce each calorie of food energy.

—we are using more calories of fuel source to produce each calorie of food energy.

So it is worth asking the question: can lower costs actually be costing us more?

THE DEMAND-SIDE STORY

The growth of industrial agriculture has not happened alone, but has been accompanied by the growth of modern or “organised” retail.

On the one hand, large retailers such as Wal-Mart, Carrefour, Tesco, Metro and others, have been widely credited for achieving cost-efficiencies from scale, and then passing on these efficiencies to the consumer in the form of lower prices (and, apparently, higher standards of living). That is a good thing and definitely of benefit to the population at large, especially in inflationary times such as these. Surely, it is good to push for lower costs rather than keeping prices high as a result of inefficient sourcing, wasteful and expensive handling, and non-value-adding costs in the supply chain.

On the other hand, these organisations are driven to standardise their own product offerings, reduce the number of supplier touch-points and increase the volume per supply source.

There is not just a reduction in diversity of suppliers, but also a reduction in the number of product variants. (I’m not referring to the number of “types” of potato chips or packaged meals, but to the actual core food product—the natural species or sub-species that are the basic source.) Of course, agriculture itself is a process of consciously selecting and encouraging species that are more useful to us humans, but industrial

• Lower costs can be delivered by reducing the variation of products

• Higher sales can come from either having consumers buy more of the same product (which in food does tend to taper off after a while), or by turning the basic product into a “value-added” product (e.g. potatoes into wafers, mash, fries; corn into syrup and food additives, and so on).

THE NEED FOR A DIFFERENT MODEL

We don’t have to look too far into the future to realise that this is not a sustainable model. (Or, as someone pithily said: “Only fools and economists believe in infinitely compounding growth.”) So far, this model has impacted less than a fifth of the world’s human population, but now the growth markets of choice for industrial agriculture companies are China and India. If these two countries move through the exactly same path as have the western economies in terms of agriculture and food processing, given the population base itself the impact may be 5-7 times (or more) on the demand for petroleum as well as the fall-out on the ecosystem.

You may ask: why should retailers and their suppliers worry about this?

Firstly, pure cost considerations – clearly, the costs of petroleum are ranging at the highest levels ever, and explosive demand through industrialised agriculture will only serve to push them up. How far can you push the food bill every month, before people start buying less? What impact would that have on large retail supply chains and farmers whose processes are increasingly built around products of industrial agriculture?

Secondly, what consumers are already beginning to express in western markets will possibly happen in India in the next few years as well: concern about where and how the product has been produced, what has been the fall-out on the environment and on the overall health of people involved with that supply chain as well as the health of consumers. Carbon footprint, food miles and locavores (people who only consume food that is produced within 100 miles of where they live) are terms that companies are increasingly becoming familiar with.

And an alternative set of questions is also being raised. Is it ok to burn non-sustainable fossil fuel if you get “carbon credits” by planting trees somewhere else—have all the carbon costs been accounted for from the start to the finish of the production process? Is it better to reduce the food miles and have food produced locally in a high-cost economy’s industrial agricultural model, or to have naturally grown foods from a more primitive farm in Africa or Asia where the environmental impact is only the “carbon debit” of the air-freight. And, even if the produce is carbon-friendly, what about the nitrogen footprint (from the fixation of nitrogen into fertilisers) and the methane footprint (from large scale animal farming)?

THE POWER OF THE SMALL AND THE MANY

And finally the question of maintaining diversity must be top- of-mind. For all its so-called inefficiency, diversity is actually a great shock-absorber. Imagine a bean bag or a piece of foam — what gives them their cushioning ability is the space and air between the little balls, or the material. Now imagine a cropland that is attacked by a pest—if there is diversity in the plant population, there is a good chance that certain varieties will survive even if others don’t; unlike a cropland with limited variety which may be totally wiped out (and possibly the farmer with it). Further imagine a supply chain that has multiple suppliers with the same or similar product versus one where the supply base is highly concentrated. Which ecosystem do you think will survive better during times of trouble, even if some of the suppliers—a part of the ecosystem—do not? (One doesn’t have to think too far: the example of the former Soviet Union with its mega manufacturing plants supplying the whole country are a case in point.)

To really find long-term solutions for food security issues, retailers, suppliers, economists and governments need to acknowledge that sustainable safety lies in numbers and diversity. A dispersed economic system with a lot of variety has resilience built in. And the solutions may actually be very close at hand, in the updating of traditional techniques.

It is high time to start figuring out how India (and China) can take the lead in creating an alternative and more sustainable model for food security for large populations, rather than blindly push development models borrowed from the 19th and 20th century western economic history.

Source: FLY ON THE WALL