5 Questions for Greg Sampson
Protecting forests, securing harvests, sharing data: Digital Public Infrastructure is expected to accelerate the agricultural transition - and connect smallholders to global markets. But where are the real barriers, and where do opportunities emerge? Ahead of the AGILE DATA & DPI SUMMIT 2026, we spoke with Greg Sampson, Solutions Architect at the International Trade Center and speaker at the Agile Data & DPI Summit, who responds to five key questions on how DPI can move from promise to practice.
Greg Sampson
Gregory Sampson is a Solutions Architect at the International Trade Centre (ITC), working at the forefront of digital public infrastructure for sustainable and deforestation-free trade. He leads the design and deployment of interoperable data systems—such as the Deforestation-Free Trade Gateway and SME Sustainability Toolkit—that help governments, cooperatives, and small businesses collect, manage, and leverage sustainability data. His work spans Africa, Latin America, and the Pacific, supporting countries and value chains to meet evolving regulations including the EUDR while strengthening local data ownership and market access. Known for bridging policy, technology, and field implementation, Gregory builds coalitions and practical tools that enable producers and SMEs not only to comply, but to derive lasting value from their data and participation in global markets.
1.
Before we dive into technicalities: What motivates you personally to champion the transition toward Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) in the agricultural sector? Was there a specific experience on the ground – a conversation with a smallholder, a failed pilot project, a surprising success – that shaped how you think about DPI?
What really motivates me comes from working closely on the ground with businesses and governments that are under increasing pressure to provide traceability and sustainability data for global markets, especially with regulations like the EU Deforestation Regulation – EUDR – coming into force.
In several countries where we support EUDR readiness, I have seen cooperatives invest huge effort into mapping member farms and organising traceability datasets, while ministries are simultaneously trying to establish national registries. But the data often ends up scattered across donor projects or private platforms that neither the cooperative nor the government fully controls.
Seeing that repeatedly was a turning point for me. It made me realise that digitalisation could easily become another burden – more reporting, more systems – instead of strengthening local actors and helping countries and producer organisations actually implement EUDR in practice.
That is why DPI resonates so strongly. It is about making sure that the data mobilised by cooperatives can feed into trusted national infrastructure that governments steward and supply chains recognise – while keeping producer organisations visible and empowered within that system. And the hope is also that, over time, cooperatives can derive value from the datasets they have invested so much effort in building, rather than being expected to hand over both the information and the hard labour of collecting it for free, often through digital solutions that themselves come at significant cost to them.
And honestly, across the EUDR country work I have been involved in, the technology is rarely the main issue. Great tools already exist such as Georoots, FAO’s Ground, WHISP, INATRACE and the Deforestation Free Trade Gateway.
2.
Now that we’ve already touched on the subject of DPI: Can you explain how DPI benefits smallholders in deforestation-free agriculture and global supply chains?
I often describe DPI as creating a shared data backbone between businesses and governments that supports EUDR implementation across the whole supply chain.
Today, in many EUDR contexts, farm data collected by cooperatives flows upward to buyers or certification systems. The cooperative may not see the deforestation risk analysis derived from its own dataset, and governments lack visibility because the information sits in project or private systems.
With a DPI approach, that same cooperative data can anchor in national or sectoral infrastructure that both cooperatives and governments use.
For example, in country implementations we support in Africa and the Pacific, cooperatives map farms using KoboCollect. The data synchronises into national or programme repositories and deforestation risk analysis can be run through WHISP. Governments can then use platforms like the Deforestation-Free Trade Gateway to signal internationally that verified national datasets exist, effectively directing EUDR buyers to trusted national information rather than each buyer recollecting data independently.
So cooperatives can verify member compliance themselves, governments gain national visibility over production areas and EUDR risk profiles, and international buyers can rely on country-anchored data.
In simple terms, DPI turns cooperative datasets into national assets that support both producer organisations and public authorities in implementing deforestation-free supply chains.
3.
Building DPI requires alignment between governments, NGOs, and farmers themselves. Where are the biggest barriers? And how can we overcome them?
There are several barriers to building DPI across governments, NGOs, and producer organisations, and we encounter them consistently in EUDR country work. Data governance is one of them, but not the only one.
On governance, cooperative data often passes through projects, NGOs, buyers, and government agencies without clear agreements on where it ultimately resides, who maintains it, or how it is reused. In some countries, ministries are trying to consolidate national EUDR registries while cooperative datasets remain locked in project platforms.
Another major barrier is interoperability. Many actors already use tools but they do not connect easily. So cooperatives end up recollecting the same farm polygons for different buyers, and governments struggle to aggregate data nationally for EUDR reporting.
There is also an institutional alignment challenge. Ministries, cooperatives, NGOs, and supply-chain actors often run parallel digital initiatives under EUDR timelines without alignment of the data collected or shared architecture.
Again, across implementations, the technology largely exists. The challenge is aligning governance, interoperability, and institutional roles around it.
4.
The upcoming summit Agile Data & DPI SUMMIT 2026 will bring together the topics of “digital public infrastructure” and agile data – two concepts that do not always appear in the same context. What is your perspective on the strategic and operational significance of combining these concepts?
For me, DPI and agile data are very complementary – especially in countries trying to implement EUDR under real-world institutional constraints.
DPI provides the long-term architecture countries need: interoperable registries, shared risk tools, trusted national datasets. Agile data provides the practical pathway to build that architecture incrementally using existing cooperative and project systems.
In several EUDR implementations we support, governments cannot replace cooperative tools already used in the field. But they can connect them step by step. For example, cooperative data collected in Kobo synchronises into national repositories, connects to WHISP for deforestation risk analysis, and interfaces with international platforms – all without disrupting field operations.
Strategically, this allows countries to move from fragmented project data toward coherent national DPI aligned with EUDR. Operationally, it allows cooperatives to keep working with familiar tools while their data becomes interoperable across national and global requirements.
So DPI is the architecture; agile data is how it becomes implementable for governments and producer systems.
5.
The summit also emphasises the importance of ‘Agility’ – moving from insight to action. In practical terms, how can we apply these principles to bridge the gap between digital transformation of food systems and the technological and digital literacy realities of actors – such as farmers, cooperatives, traders – on the ground?
I think the key is recognising that digital transformation in agriculture is already happening – mainly through cooperatives and producer networks – while governments are trying to consolidate and sustain those efforts nationally to meet regulations like EUDR. The gap is not so much technology; it is alignment across levels.
From EUDR work across more than twenty countries, one consistent lesson is that transformation succeeds when cooperative workflows, project tools, and national systems are connected rather than replaced.
Collaborative spaces like the Agile Data & DPI Summit are valuable because they bring ministries, businesses and technology actors together around these practical integration pathways. When countries share real DPI implementations, partnerships emerge and ecosystems scale faster.
Ultimately, the opportunity is to move from isolated digital projects toward shared DPI frameworks where governments provide continuity, cooperatives mobilise and steward data, and supply chains rely on trusted national information to implement deforestation-free trade.
