On hold
NARRATIVE VALUE
Certainty
●○○ low
ABCDEFG
The assessment is on hold, awaiting a build-up of confirmed evidence.= non-additive meter
As of: 2026-Q4Status: ActiveCeiling reason: No confirmed −
History2026-Q4HHistory grows each quarter
SiembraViva (JUACO): From delivering organic vegetables to advising farms. At present independent evidence is scarce, so the assessment is on hold. Unconfirmed concerns are placed under “Watching.” (As of 2026-Q4; estimate based on public information.)
Main narrative
SiembraViva, started in Medellín in 2014, was known as an e-commerce business delivering organic vegetables grown by smallholders directly to urban consumers. By fixing purchase prices in advance and advising on when to plant and harvest according to demand, it aimed to stabilize what farmers took home.
The service the company publishes today has changed considerably. At its centre is a digital advisory service for farms called "JUACO", which sends weather and soil information to farmers through a phone messaging app and teaches them, over seven live sessions, how to make worm compost for use on their own land. There is also a scheme that trains people locally to support farms and admits them to a "verified supplier network". It covers farms in Colombia, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Mexico and charges a monthly subscription. For the business after this change, no independent evaluation or record of benefit could be found.
One person’s story (N1)
+ A single story
No case identified (first-hand reporting required). At its founding in 2014 the business delivered smallholders' organic vegetables directly to urban consumers, fixing purchase prices in advance to stabilize what farmers took home; it has since shifted substantially to a digital advisory service for farms (JUACO). For the period after that shift, no specific before-and-after could be confirmed in either independent or programme-official sources. Nature of sources: programme-official (description of the current service only).
Source nature: SiembraViva / Acumen / T2 programme-official. Positive effects are not used to offset negatives.
Positive / negative effects
+ effects
- The positive side of this assessment rests on the single story (N1) above and its source. A per-item ledger of positive effects has not yet been compiled for this organization.T2 programme-official
Watching (unconfirmed; not counted in the assessment)- No independent material on outcomes after the shift in business
- subscription limits who is covered
Looking ahead (not included in the assessment)- Expanding the countries covered and the verified supplier network.
A second look
The business has shifted substantially from direct sales of organic produce to advisory services for farms, and no independent material on benefit after that shift could be found. Whether the improvement in farmers' earnings shown under the earlier model also occurs in the present one is unknown. A monthly subscription also means the service is limited to farmers who can pay.
Sources
+N1SiembraViva / Acumen｜2026｜🔗
How to read this assessment
A Independently verified +, with no confirmed −
B Leans +, with independent backing
C Mixed. A confirmed − sets the ceiling, or much is unverified
D A serious confirmed − sets the ceiling
E A serious − reaches the core of the organization
F Serious and systemic, with little redeeming +
G Only extreme cases
Out of scope An entity whose core purpose is illegal
On hold Independent evidence is scarce on both + and −
- Reachable upper bound (ceiling): a confirmed − sets the ceiling, and independently verified + decide the position within it. + do not cancel out −.
- The weight of evidence is not symmetric: only confirmed − are counted; the volume of disputes or allegations goes under “Watching.” + are counted from independent evidence, while an organization’s own PR is treated as “reference.”
- Size is not value: scale is not used in the assessment. Matters that stay within money or competition—investors, shareholders, sanctions, trade secrets—are also excluded.
- The letter (assessment) and certainty (how reliable the information is) are separate axes.
This is a translation; the Japanese version is authoritative. The assessments here are generated automatically by AI based on published criteria. The operator does not alter individual results. Because they are AI-generated they may contain errors, and they are opinion and commentary, not statements of fact. Where evidence is insufficient, the entry is marked “On hold.” Requests for correction are accepted via the form.
Terms: Narrative Value = an assessment (A–G) of the distance between the narrative an organization tells and its reality / Ceiling meter = a visualization of the reachable upper bound / Watching = unconfirmed matters not counted / Protected stakeholders = people, animals, nature, and future generations. | Generated by: AI | As of: 2026-Q4 | Back to top