| Subsistence = The Agricultural Revolution era agricultural package.
Ltd-era = The Industrial Ltd-era agricultural package. To fully grasp why technological innovations alone fail to alleviate farmers' poverty, it’s crucial to understand the implications of the table above: a prosperous and sustainable Agricultural Package depends on the cohesive alignment and integration of ALL its components, ensuring they remain competitive with the latest state-of-the-art advancements. Let me explain with an example. Consider a smallholder with 10 hectares of cotton, generating an annual income of $1,000. One day, this farmer receives an unexpected gift: a cotton-picking combine worth $500,000. This combine can harvest 100 hectares per day but comes with significant maintenance costs—$100 per day when idle and $1,000 per day when in use. Although the combine was a gift, can the farmer truly benefit from this advanced technology for his 10 hectares? Can he afford the maintenance costs? Does he have the skills and staff to operate such complex machinery? Moreover, does he have the logistical and marketing capabilities to utilize the combine on additional farms? And if he does, has he transitioned from being a small-scale farmer to becoming a service provider? The table reveals a reality often overlooked: smallholders operate within a mixed Agricultural Package. Their family, colleagues, and village are still rooted in the Agricultural Revolution era's ecosystems and business models. At the same time, the surrounding world speaks the language of the Industrial Ltd-era's ecosystems, business models, technologies/services. This blend of Agricultural Packages—combining elements from the Agricultural Revolution and the Industrial Ltd-era—inevitably leads to clashes, misalignments, and inefficiencies. The result is always predictable: advanced, cohesive packages consistently offer better livelihoods than those that rely on outdated or mismatched elements. Resisting this historical shift is as futile as trying to revert to a hunter-gatherer economy instead of modern agriculture. When we attempt to modernize an outdated agricultural package rooted in the Agricultural Revolution, such as those used by smallholders, by introducing advanced technologies like GMO seeds and fertilizers, we risk exacerbating existing mismatches and imbalances within the package's components, leading to potential failure. As demonstrated by the cotton combine example, farmers can only fully benefit from technologies and services when these elements are aligned with the other components of their agricultural package. This mismatch highlights why repeated efforts to introduce advanced technologies and services often fail. To create meaningful and lasting change, it is essential to simultaneously cope with and upgrade all components of an Agricultural Package. The Kibbutz model exemplifies this principle by seamlessly aligning and upgrading the entire Agricultural Package. It transforms the traditional village system, rooted in the Agricultural Revolution, into the innovative Kibbutz model. In this model, everyone collaborates like a modern company, community, or startup—fully committed to the organization's mission and aligned with the most advanced package of the Industrial Ltd-era. This cohesive and resilient foundation was pivotal in Israel's emergence as the “startup nation” it is today. SHIFTING THE PROSPERITY NEEDLE As we now understand, the prosperity of organizations and societies lies on a continuum—the Poverty-Prosperity Scale—where their position is determined by their degree of togetherness and integration on the Isolation-Togetherness scale. Isolation: Numerous programs aim to teach impoverished farmers self-reliance, promoting the idea that survival depends on independence and isolation. However, by encouraging them to embrace isolation, we inadvertently push them toward the lower end of the Isolation-Togetherness scale, trapping them in a cycle of poverty. Consider North Korea, which emphasizes self-reliance and isolation; has this led to increased prosperity? The answer is clear: Isolation—whether as a lone individual, like Robinson Crusoe, or as a nation like North Korea—does not lead to prosperity and, at best, leads to 'survival mode'. Togetherness: Instead, the key to prosperity lies in moving the needle towards togetherness. We can accelerate and enhance prosperity by fostering cooperation, collaboration, and integration among farmers and value chain partners, who collectively form the ecosystem of the desired package. The principle is simple: the more "together" we are, the faster and more effectively prosperity will manifest. Working together presents challenges, particularly in establishing the necessary organizational structures—such as cooperatives or Kibbutz models—but it also opens the door to introducing innovations and successfully utilizing existing advanced business models, technologies, and services that drive prosperity. Adopting organizational structures and models that foster togetherness, collaboration, cooperation, a sense of belonging, and integration paves the way for prosperity and happiness. With this insight, imagine you are tasked with increasing prosperity and happiness among smallholders. In the past, you might have turned to agrotech companies, believing that new tools or technological innovations would solve all problems, boost farmers' income, and enhance the national economy. However, the actual impact does not lie in "what type of technology" but in "how we enhance societal togetherness and integration” – the "how" precedes the "what". As professionals in this field, we are responsible for strategically steering our communities and organizations toward greater togetherness, thereby unlocking the full potential of prosperity and happiness. THE TOGETHER NEVER-ENDING JOURNEY I was born into the world of a Kibbutz, where farming was revered as the noblest of professions, and farmers were viewed as leaders—the elite—responsible for shaping the future, sustaining prosperity, and enhancing happiness. As I grew older, experts taught me that technological advancements drove success and prosperity. This belief led me to pursue a Ph.D. in agriculture, establish an agrotech company, and develop advanced agricultural technologies to foster this promised future of prosperity and happiness. However, the experts' theories soon collided when faced with the harsh realities, and reality won. Despite continuous efforts to alleviate poverty by providing access to advanced technology and knowledge, these initiatives failed to uplift impoverished smallholders, leaving me confused and disillusioned. Like a child, I began to ask questions, challenging long-held assumptions about the role of tangible factors, like technology, which were assumed to drive fundamental positive change. At the same time, I revisited the elements behind successful historical transformations—such as the Kibbutz, the Agricultural Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, the invention of the Ltd company, and the end of slavery and colonialism—and uncovered the pivotal role of intangible factors like core values, vision, mission, and guiding principles. These intangibles foster a powerful sense of togetherness, ultimately leading to sustainable prosperity. This process taught me not to take "established truths" at face value, especially when addressing persistent issues like poverty. It also highlighted the power of questioning unproven "truths”, the importance of basing predictions on models, preferably those based on universal laws instead of patterns, and the significance of intangible elements like ecosystems and business models. We are often conditioned to accept answers and directives from experts or those in authority while viewing those who challenge these answers as naive or uninformed. Yet, relentless questioning, challenging assumptions, and re-examining core beliefs have fueled humanity's progress. Let this journey be a call and honorary salute to those who dare to see the world differently, question, disagree, challenge what seems obvious to everybody else, and rethink yesterday's assumptions, including their own. Let's celebrate the marginalized, the unconventional thinkers, the undisciplined outliers, and the outcasts—those who see the world differently. Their perspectives and contributions have made and will continue to make this world a better place for all of us. Suppose we recognize that each of us is marginalized, unconventional, undisciplined, an outlier, and an outcast in our own way. In that case, we will see how successful we can be when working together toward a shared vision and mission. | 
