Investors
Building the evidence layer beneath agricultural climate markets.
Evidence infrastructure for agricultural climate reliance — a narrow wedge, milestone-gated, with a public working surface and published invalidation conditions.
1 — Thesis
The category
Agricultural operational systems already produce the records that buyers, verifiers, program operators and reporting entities need. What is missing is the layer that binds those records to source, authority, identity, software version and rights, exposes what is missing, and assembles bounded artifacts an external party can inspect. AgEvidence's venture thesis is to turn customer-specific evidence mappings into shared schemas, adapters, conformance fixtures, artifact profiles and managed operating infrastructure that reduce marginal delivery cost over time. Infrastructure, not consultancy — but only if reuse is demonstrated.
2 — Why now
Upstream evidence is becoming the binding constraint
- Buyer and program decisions increasingly depend on upstream operational evidence, not downstream estimates.
- Scope 3 and insetting programs push evidence obligations onto suppliers who never had to produce them.
- Methane intervention claims require device, dose, calibration and model provenance that no single system holds.
- Assurance teams need to inspect lineage and limitations, not accept a summary number.
3 — Product wedge
Narrow by design
Event Inbox
Source manifests
Evidence gaps
Bounded artifact
Reuse
4 — Why Australia first
First production country adapter
Australian and adjacent livestock evidence flows — methane interventions, processor evidence, externally reviewed climate claims, Scope 3 and insetting programs — give a bounded, high-obligation starting market with identifiable technical counterparts. Australia is the first production country adapter, not the limit of the company.
5 — Business model
Engagement ladder
- 01Evidence Architecture Sprint
- 02Implementation / Readiness Engagement
- 03Reliance Artifact
- 04Managed Evidence Operations
6 — Venture-scale mechanism
What each engagement contributes back
- reusable schemas and event handlers;
- country, method and buyer adapters;
- conformance fixtures and artifact profiles;
- documented reviewer expectations;
- policy operations that generalise;
- institutional adoption of the vocabulary.
7 — Milestone gates
Sequenced, not simultaneous
30 days
- 5–8 privately activated accounts
- 3+ external technical actions
- 2 real evidence mappings
- 1 paid engagement
90 days
- First bounded artifact reviewed externally
- Second evidence family mapped
- Reusable fixture library
12 months
- Second-customer reuse of schemas and adapters
- Recurring managed operations contract
- Declining bespoke effort per engagement
24 months
- External schema or conformance adoption
- Country adapters beyond Australia
- Gross margin improving with reuse
8 — Proof
Inspect rather than take on trust
- public repository at an exact tagged release;
- clean-machine setup instructions and test register;
- sample event, manifest, gap report and review ledger;
- sample bounded artifact with local verification;
- published known limitations.
9 — Risks and stop conditions
Conditions that would invalidate the thesis
- no paid demand;
- no named external obligation behind an engagement;
- no second-customer reuse of schemas or adapters;
- every artifact requires analyst reconstruction;
- recurring operations are not credible to the counterparty;
- gross margin does not improve across engagements.
10 — Documents
Diligence materials
Investment memorandum
AgEvidence Australia — VC investment memorandum and product proposal (PDF).