Leaps by Bayer has released the Ag Playbook 2.0, expanding the attempt to bring greater transparency to the realities of agtech product development, whilst addressing criticism that last year’s inaugural edition unintentionally sent a harsh message to early-stage innovators.
One venture capitalist’s blunt reaction to the first Playbook: “This space isn’t for you unless you’re prepared to spend $1B” has lingered in the industry. But PJ Amini, VP of Agriculture Venture Investments at Leaps by Bayer and editor of the Playbook, says that interpretation misses the point.
A framework meant to inform
Amini told AgTechNavigator: “The Ag Playbook is authored and reviewed by entrepreneurs, experience R&D experts, early and late-stage investors alike.” He stressed “it is not aimed to demotivate or dissuade innovators or early-stage investors, but to help arm them with information.”
He said the goal was simply to lay out the realities, rather than “bury the truth”, about the time and cost required to bring regulated agricultural technologies to market.
The first Playbook highlighted that crop protection small molecules require roughly 12 years and around $350 million to develop.
Those numbers, Amini said, were never meant to imply that every agtech innovation demands that level of capital. Instead, they represented one category among many, each with its own cost curve.
New chapters, new voices, and a broader scope
Ag Playbook 2.0 broadens the lens. Major updates include: a new chapter on biomolecules, written by industry experts; a ‘State of the Market’ introduction by Scott Porter of Westerra Capital; and a section on regulatory trends from Jerry Hjelle, former Monsanto VP and long-time biotech regulatory specialist.
Another key contributor is Thomas Laurent, founder and CEO of Micropep Technologies, whose start-up focuses on bioactive peptides for crop protection.
For biomolecules, the contributors estimate shorter timelines and significantly lower development costs; around 7-14 years and $30-62 million.
These contrasts, Amini said, illustrate why the Playbook exists: to show the range of development pathways rather than present a single, prohibitive benchmark.
“There are not yet chapters on digital products, biofertility solutions, seed and genetic technologies,” he added. “Each one will have different timelines and costs.”
“This is how pharma does it – and ag should too”
Amini argued that agtech can borrow lessons from the pharmaceutical industry, where development costs are often even higher ($1-2 billion and similar decade-long pathways) but where investors understand the phase‑based development model and its value inflection points.
“There is a robust ecosystem of investors and entrepreneurs who are undeterred by the costs and timelines,” he said. The Ag Playbook aims to give ag innovators the same clarity, helping investors back companies at the right moments.
Benchmarking today to accelerate tomorrow
The Playbook acknowledges that agtech and pharma face different hurdles – ag’s seasonality and farmer adoption barriers versus pharma’s stricter human‑health regulations. But it believes both industries share a need for disciplined development plans.
Emerging technologies such as AI and automation are beginning to accelerate some phases, but the Playbook avoids prescribing specific technological shortcuts. Instead, it focuses on: establishing a regulatory strategy early; partnering with cooperatives and strategics for testing; and identifying pitfalls that commonly slow start-ups.
“Understanding the current paradigm of costs and timelines gives entrepreneurs the benchmarks against which they aim to innovate, accelerate, or transform,” Amini said.
Regulation and field trials: still the biggest bottlenecks
When asked which hurdles most constrain emerging companies, Amini pointed to two familiar pain points: regulatory requirements; and field testing costs and timelines.
Ag Playbook 2.0 includes a dedicated regulatory strategy section from Hjelle, and a new field‑testing guide within the biomolecules chapter to help companies plan the testing required as products near market.
Scale-up challenges remain highly product‑specific. For biomolecules, Amini said the authors emphasised early modelling of production costs, enabling companies to map out realistic unit economics sooner.
A framework for realistic planning and higher success rates
Ultimately, Amini said, the Playbook aims to promote better‑grounded development plans, more aligned fundraising strategies, and higher odds that new innovations will reach farmers.
“The goal is to guide start-ups and investors on realistic development planning, leading to realistic funding and timeline plans, and hopefully higher likelihoods of success in bringing new products to market that improve farmers’ and consumers’ lives.”
Far from telling smaller players they don’t belong in agtech, Amini insists the Playbook is designed to help them navigate the complexity, rather than be blindsided by it.
