HyveGeo’s approach to restoring degraded land stands out at the FoodTech Challenge
Updated
January 21, 2026 11:09 AM
Clusters of sandstone buttes in Monument Valley, Colorado Plateau. PHOTO: UNSPLASH
HyveGeo, a climate-focused startup, has been named one of the global winners of the FoodTech Challenge, an international competition designed to surface practical technologies that strengthen food systems in arid and climate-stressed regions.
The FoodTech Challenge (FTC) is based in the UAE and brings together governments, foundations and agri-food institutions to identify early-stage solutions that address food production, land degradation and resource efficiency. Each year, hundreds of startups apply from around the world. In 2026, more than 1,200 teams from 113 countries submitted entries. Only four were selected.
HyveGeo stood out for its approach to one of agriculture’s hardest problems: how to make desert soil usable again. Founded in 2023 by a group of scientists and researchers, the Abu Dhabi-based company focuses on regenerating degraded land using a process built around biochar, a carbon-rich material made from agricultural waste, enhanced with microalgae. The aim is to accelerate soil recovery in environments where water is limited and land has been heavily stressed.
What caught the judges’ attention was not just the technology itself, but the way it links several challenges at once. The system turns waste into a usable soil input, reduces the time it takes for land to become productive and locks carbon into the ground instead of releasing it into the atmosphere. In short, it addresses land degradation, food production and climate pressure through a single framework.
As a winner of the FoodTech Challenge, HyveGeo will share a US$2 million prize with the other selected startups. Beyond funding, the company will also receive support from the UAE’s innovation ecosystem, including research backing, pilot projects, market access and incubation services to help move from testing into wider deployment.
The team’s plans focus on scaling within the UAE first. HyveGeo aims to work across Abu Dhabi’s network of farms and gradually expand into other arid and climate-stressed regions. Its longer-term target is to restore thousands of hectares of degraded land and contribute to carbon removal through soil-based methods.
Placed in a broader context, HyveGeo’s win reflects a shift in how food and climate technologies are being evaluated. Instead of chasing dramatic breakthroughs, competitions like the FTC are increasingly backing systems that connect waste, land, water and carbon into something usable on the ground. Not futuristic agriculture, but practical repair work for environments that can no longer rely on old farming assumptions. If that direction continues, the next wave of food innovation may be less about spectacle and more about quiet, scalable fixes for places where growing food has become hardest.
Keep Reading
HKU professor apologizes after PhD student’s AI-assisted paper cites fabricated sources.
Updated
January 8, 2026 6:33 PM
.jpg)
The University of Hong Kong in Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong Island. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
It’s no surprise that artificial intelligence, while remarkably capable, can also go astray—spinning convincing but entirely fabricated narratives. From politics to academia, AI’s “hallucinations” have repeatedly shown how powerful technology can go off-script when left unchecked.
Take Grok-2, for instance. In July 2024, the chatbot misled users about ballot deadlines in several U.S. states, just days after President Joe Biden dropped his re-election bid against former President Donald Trump. A year earlier, a U.S. lawyer found himself in court for relying on ChatGPT to draft a legal brief—only to discover that the AI tool had invented entire cases, citations and judicial opinions. And now, the academic world has its own cautionary tale.
Recently, a journal paper from the Department of Social Work and Social Administration at the University of Hong Kong was found to contain fabricated citations—sources apparently created by AI. The paper, titled “Forty Years of Fertility Transition in Hong Kong,” analyzed the decline in Hong Kong’s fertility rate over the past four decades. Authored by doctoral student Yiming Bai, along with Yip Siu-fai, Vice Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and other university officials, the study identified falling marriage rates as a key driver behind the city’s shrinking birth rate. The authors recommended structural reforms to make Hong Kong’s social and work environment more family-friendly.
But the credibility of the paper came into question when inconsistencies surfaced among its references. Out of 61 cited works, some included DOI (Digital Object Identifier) links that led to dead ends, displaying “DOI Not Found.” Others claimed to originate from academic journals, yet searches yielded no such publications.
Speaking to HK01, Yip acknowledged that his student had used AI tools to organize the citations but failed to verify the accuracy of the generated references. “As the corresponding author, I bear responsibility”, Yip said, apologizing for the damage caused to the University of Hong Kong and the journal’s reputation. He clarified that the paper itself had undergone two rounds of verification and that its content was not fabricated—only the citations had been mishandled.
Yip has since contacted the journal’s editor, who accepted his explanation and agreed to re-upload a corrected version in the coming days. A formal notice addressing the issue will also be released. Yip said he would personally review each citation “piece by piece” to ensure no errors remain.
As for the student involved, Yip described her as a diligent and high-performing researcher who made an honest mistake in her first attempt at using AI for academic assistance. Rather than penalize her, Yip chose a more constructive approach, urging her to take a course on how to use AI tools responsibly in academic research.
Ultimately, in an age where generative AI can produce everything from essays to legal arguments, there are two lessons to take away from this episode. First, AI is a powerful assistant, but only that. The final judgment must always rest with us. No matter how seamless the output seems, cross-checking and verifying information remain essential. Second, as AI becomes integral to academic and professional life, institutions must equip students and employees with the skills to use it responsibly. Training and mentorship are no longer optional; they’re the foundation for using AI to enhance, not undermine, human work.
Because in this age of intelligent machines, staying relevant isn’t about replacing human judgment with AI, it’s about learning how to work alongside it.