Skip to main content
Log in

Analysis of India’s agricultural ecosystem using knowledge-based Tantra framework

  • Original Research
  • Published:
CSI Transactions on ICT Aims and scope Submit manuscript


The information systems have been extremely useful in managing businesses, enterprises, and public institutions such as government departments. But today’s challenges are increasingly about managing ecosystems. Ecosystem is a useful paradigm to better understand a variety of domains such as biology, business, industry, agriculture, and society. In this paper, we look at the Indian Agricultural ecosystem. It is a mammoth task to assimilate the information for the whole ecosystem consisting of consumers, producers, workers, traders, transporters, industry, and Government. There are myriad interventions by the state and the central Governments, whose efficacy is difficult to track and the outcomes hard to assess. A policy intervention that helps one part of the ecosystem can harm the other. In addition, sustainability and ecological considerations are also extremely important. In this paper, we make use of the Knowledge-based Tantra Social Information Management Framework to analyze the Indian Agricultural Ecosystem and build related Knowledge Graphs. Our analysis spans descriptive, normative, and transformative viewpoints. Tantra Framework makes use of concepts from Zachman Framework to manage aspects of social information through different perspectives and concepts from Unified Foundational Ontology to represent interrelationships between aspects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not Applicable.


  1. Academy P (2009) Kautilya’s Arthashastra. The way of Financial Management and Economic Governance, Jaico Publishing. ISBN 978-81-8495-029-8

  2. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (2020) FAO in India.

  3. The Hindu (2019) Do farm loan waivers alleviate agricultural distress? | Parley podcast, Economists S. Mahendra Dev and M. Govinda Rao talk about the implications of farm loan waivers and what they mean for credit culture in India’s rural economy.

  4. Mathew JC (2019) Skew towards PM-Kisan. Business Today, July 28, 2019.

  5. Alagh YK (2018) The uncovered last mile. The Indian Express, October 4, 2018.

  6. Tiwari O (2021) Farm Laws Explained, Time to end the impasse, India TV News, February 5, 2021.

  7. Johnson GL (1971) The quest for relevance in agricultural economics. Am J Agric Econ 53(5):728–739. JSTOR. Accessed 31 July 2021

  8. Zep W (1994.) Improving the transfer and use of agricultural information, a guide to information technology, World Bank Discussion Paper no. 247, July 1994

  9. Harris SC (1990) Agricultural information in developing countries. Libr Trends 58(5):578–634

    Google Scholar 

  10. Galtier F, David-Benz H, Subervie J, Egg J (2014) Agricultural market information systems in developing countries: new models, new impacts. Cahiers Agric 23:232–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Singh S (2006) Selected success stories on agricultural information systems, Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions, September 2006.

  12. Berdegue JA, Escobar GA, Berdegué J, Escobar G (2001) Agricultural knowledge and information systems and rural poverty. Paper commissioned by the agricultural knowledge and information (AKIS) Network of the World Bank.

  13. Birthal P, Adhiguru P, Balasubramanian GK (2009) Strengthening pluralistic agricultural information delivery systems in India. Agric Econ Res Rev 22

  14. Msoffe G, Ngulube P (2016) Agricultural information dissemination in rural areas of developing countries: a proposed model for Tanzania. Afr J Libr Arch Inf Sci 26:167–187

    Google Scholar 

  15. Delone W, McLean E (2003) The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. J Manag Inf Syst 19:9–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mardis MA, Hoffman ES, Marshall TE (2008) A new framework for understanding educational digital library use: re-examining digital divides in US schools. Int J Digital Lib 9(1):19–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Patel N, Shah K, Savani K, Klemmer S, Dave P, Parikh T (2012) Power to the peers: authority of source effects for a voice-based agricultural information service in Rural India.

  18. Opara UN (2008) Agricultural information sources used by farmers in Imo State. Nigeria Inf Dev 24(4):289–295.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Vidanapthirana N (2019) Agricultural information systems and their applications for development of agriculture and rural community, a review study

  20. Rao NH (2007) A framework for implementing information and communication technologies in agricultural development in India. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 74:491–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pazek K, Rozman Č (2009) Decision making under conditions of uncertainty in agriculture: a case study of oil crops. Poljoprivreda (Osijek) 15

  22. Nitsenko V, Mardani A, Streimikis J, Ishchenko M, Chaikovsky M, Stoyanovakoval S, Arutiunian R (2019) Automatic information system of risk assessment for agricultural enterprises of Ukraine. Monten. J. Econ. Econ. Lab. Transit. Res. (ELIT) 15(2):139–152

    Google Scholar 

  23. Vermeulen S, Challinor A, Thornton P, Campbell BM, Eriyagama N, Vervoort J, Kinyangi J, Jarvis A, Laderach P, Ramirez-Villegas J, Nicklin K, Hawkins E, Smith D (2013) Addressing uncertainty in adaptation planning for agriculture. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 256:110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Peltoniemi M, Vuori E (2008) Business ecosystem as the new approach to complex adaptive business environments. In: Proceedings of EBusiness research forum

  25. World Resources Institute (2000) World resources 2000–2001: people and ecosystems: the fraying web of life. Report Series.

  26. Kauffman S (1993) The origins of order: self-organization and selection in evolution. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kauffman S (1995) At home in the universe: The search for the laws of self-organization and complexity. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lotka AJ (1910) Contribution to the theory of periodic reaction. J Phys Chem 14(3):271–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Volterra V (1931) Variations and fluctuations of the number of individuals in animal species living together. In: Chapman, R. N. Animal ecology. McGraw–Hill

  30. Rothschild M (1990) Bionomics: economy as ecosystem. Henry Holt and Company, New York, p 423p

    Google Scholar 

  31. Vuori EK (2005) Knowledge-intensive service organizations as agents in a business ecosystem. In: Proceedings of ICSSSM'05, international conference on services systems and services management 2005

  32. Moore JF (1999) Predators and prey, a new ecology of competition. In: Harvard business review

  33. Iansiti M, Levien R (2004) The keystone advantage: what the new dynamics of business ecosystems mean for strategy, innovation, and sustainability. Harward Business School Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  34. Power T, Jerjian G (2001) Ecosystem: living the 12 principles of networked business. Pearson Education Ltd, New York

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pagie LWP (1999) Information integration in evolutionary processes. Dissertation thesis, Faculteit Biologie, Universiteit Utrecht, ISBN 9039322775

  36. Smith MY, Stacey R (1997) Governance and cooperative networks: an adaptive systems perspective. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 54(1):79–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Holland JH (1995) Hidden order. How adaptation builds complexity. Perseus Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  38. Holland JH (1992) Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. The University of Michigan, Michigan

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Peltoniemi M (2006) Preliminary theoretical framework for the study of business ecosystems. In: Emergence: complexity and organization

  40. Marrow P, Koubarakis M, van Langen RH, et al (2011) Agents in decentralised information ecosystems: the DIET approach. In: Proceedings of the AISB'01 symposium on information agents for electronic commerce, (part of the AISB'01 convention), Volume: ISBN 1-902956-20-5

  41. (UNIDO), International Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC), United Nations Industrial Development Organization (1998) Fertilizer manual, 3rd edn. Kluwer Academic, Boston. p. 46. ISBN 978-0792350118. Retrieved 6 November 2014

  42. Wikipedia, Organic Farming.

  43. Das S, Chatterjee A, Pal TK (2020) Organic farming in India: a vision towards a healthy nation. Food Qual Saf 4(2):69–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Food and Agricultural Organization, Zero Budget Natural Farming. Last accessed on July 31, 2021

  45. Khadse A, Rosset PM (2019) Zero budget natural farming in India—from inception to institutionalization. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Prabhu SM (2015) Can we think of replacing the subsidy regime with a Flexible Social Benefit Plan. Swarajya Magazine, August 27, 2015.

  47. Arcot PP, Rao CV (2019) Excellence in agri-marketing through national agricultural market (NAM) for sustainability of Indian farming sector. Archiv Bus Res.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Deodhar SY A 2020 Vision of India’s farm market reforms, IIM Ahmedabad working paper no. 2021-01-02.

  49. Sharma VP (2007) India’s Agrarian crisis and smallholder producers’ participation in new farm supply chain initiatives: a case study of contract farming, IIM Ahmedabad, 2007 WP-No-2007-08-01.

  50. Shankar A (2021) Indian agriculture farm acts: 2020. Int J Mod Agric 10(2), 2907–2914.

  51. Chatterjee S, Krishnamurthy M (2021) Farm laws versus field realities: understanding India's agricultural markets Sikh Res J 6(1).

  52. Chhibber A (2021) Farm protests in India: a new menu needed. Working papers 2021-01, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy

  53. Bhattacharya S, Patel U (2021) Farmers’ agitation in India due to audacious farm bill of 2020. Int J Res Eng Sci Manag 4:35–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Mundle S (2021) The entangled economics and politics of India’s farm agitation, Mint, 19 March 2021.

  55. Jha S, Srinivasan PV, Landes M (2007) Indian wheat and rice sector politics and the implications of reform. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Report no 41, May 2007.

  56. Chang T-C (2003) Development of leisure farms in Taiwan, and perceptions of visitors thereto. J Travel Tour Mark 15:19–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Zachman JA (2003) ‘Zachman Framework, A primer for enterprise engineering and manufacturing.

  58. Zachman (2007) The framework for enterprise architecture: background, description and utility

  59. Santos Jr, P et al (2013) An ontology-based analysis and semantics for organizational structure modelling in the ARIS method. Inf Syst J

  60. Prabhu SM, Murthy KNB, Natarajan S (2019) Validating Tantra framework using entropy. N Soc Netw Anal Min 9:18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Prabhu SM (2017) Information management framework for good governance ADCOM 2017, held on September 9–10, 2017 at IIIT Bangalore. Published in IEEE Explore, April 2019

  62. Prabhu SM, Murthy KNB, Natarajan S (2018) Knowledge management using ontology based Tantra framework for good governance. SRELS J Inf Manag 55(6):299–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Prabhu SM (2019) Development of network-based framework for managing social information. Ph.D. thesis, Visvesvaraya Technological University

  64. Prabhu SM, Balasubramanya Murthy KN, Subramanyam N (2020) Identity management using ontology-based Tantra framework. In: 2020 8th International conference on reliability, Infocom technologies and optimization (trends and future directions) (ICRITO), pp 52–56.

  65. Prabhu SM, Murthy KNB, Natarajan S (2018) Revenue capture using ontology-based Tantra framework. Int J Manag Technol Eng 8(3).

  66. Prabhu SM, Murthy KNB, Natarajan S (2019) Intelligent social banking using Tantra framework. In: ICBAI 2019 conference, February 4–6 2019, Amity University, Dubai.

  67. Prabhu SM, Murthy KNB, Natarajan S (2019) Balanced development using ontology-based tantra framework. SRELS J Inf Manag 56:134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Prabhu SM, Murthy KNB, Natarajan S (2019) Balanced growth using ontology-based tantra framework. SRELS J Inf Manag.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Prabhu SM, Murthy KNB, Natarajan S (2019) Transforming India’s electoral democracy using Tantra framework. CSIT.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Prabhu SM, Subramaniam N (2021) Transforming India’s social sector using ontology-based Tantra framework. In: Kaiser MS, Xie J, Rathore VS (eds) Information and communication technology for competitive strategies (ICTCS 2020). Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 190. Springer, Singapore.

  71. Fatolahi A, Fereidoon S (2006) An investigation into applying UML to the Zachman framework. Inf Syst Front 8(2):133–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Weiss CH (1995) Nothing as practical as good theory: exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In: Connel JP, Kubisch AC, Scorr LB (eds) New approaches to evaluating community initiatives, concepts, methods, and contexts. The Aspen Institute, Washington. ISBN-10: 0898431670, ISBN-13: 978-0898431674

  73. Steins D, Valters C (2012) Understanding the theory of change in international development. Justice and Security Research Program, paper 1, ISSN 2051-0926

  74. Bartels (1968) The general theory of marketing. J Market JSTOR

  75. BMC Software, How to embrace ITIL as an organization.

  76. Ponge JF (2005) Emergent properties from organisms to ecosystems: towards a realistic approach. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 80(3):403–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Saravanan R (2012) ICTs for agricultural extension in India: policy implications for developing Countries. In: Proceedings of the 8th Asian conference for information technology in agriculture, AFITA, pp 1–11

  78. Armstrong LJ, Diepeveen D (2008) Developing an information-driven ICT framework for Agriculture. World conference on agricultural information and IT

  79. Rao NH (2007) A framework for implementing information and communication technologies in agricultural development in India. Technol Forecast Social Change 74(4):491–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Bökle S, Paraforos DS, Reiser D, Griepentrog HW (2022) Conceptual framework of a decentral digital farming system for resilient and safe data management. Smart Agric Technol 2:100039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Palma R, et al (2022) Agricultural information model. In: Bochtis DD, Sørensen CG, Fountas S, Moysiadis V, Pardalos PM (eds) information and communication technologies for agriculture—theme III: decision. Springer optimization and its applications, vol 184. Springer, Cham.

  82. Nicholson CF, Kopainsky B, Stephens EC et al (2020) Conceptual frameworks linking agriculture and food security. Nat Food 1:541–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. DFID ’ s Conceptual Framework on Agriculture (2015)

  84. Najdovski B, Manevska V (2021) Framework for the development of agricultural information systems in information technologies and automation-2021

  85. Munyua H, Stilwell C (2013) A theoretical framework for the study of agricultural knowledge and information systems in a developing country. Mousaion 31:29–57

    Google Scholar 

  86. Mehta NM (2021) How to exit farming risk trap, Indian Express, July 29, 2021.

Download references


The author acknowledges the valuable feedback on this research received from Dr. S. G. Deshmukh, Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, IIT Delhi, and Dr. K. N. B. Murthy, Vice-Chancellor, Dayanand Sagar University, Bengaluru



Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shreekanth M. Prabhu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest


Appendix A: Tantra knowledge graphs for agricultural ecosystem

Appendix A: Tantra knowledge graphs for agricultural ecosystem

Here we provide the Knowledge Graphs generated for Agricultural Ecosystem using Tantra Framework.

(i) Persons and Roles Associated with the Agricultural Ecosystem

figure a

(ii) Types of Farms

figure b

(iii) MSP Crops

figure c

(iv) Measures in Agricultural Ecosystem

figure d

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prabhu, S.M., Subramanyam, N. Analysis of India’s agricultural ecosystem using knowledge-based Tantra framework. CSIT 11, 129–155 (2023).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: