Bill Overview
Title: Plant Biostimulant Act of 2022
Description: This bill excludes plant biostimulants (i.e., a substance, micro-organism, or mixture thereof that supports a plant's natural processes independently of the biostimulant's nutrient content) from regulation under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The bill also requires the Department of Agriculture to study the types of plant biostimulants and practices of plant biostimulant use that best achieve certain results, such as increasing organic matter content.
Sponsors: Rep. Panetta, Jimmy [D-CA-20]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in the agriculture industry and consumers worldwide
Estimated Size: 12000000
- Biostimulants are used widely in agriculture to enhance plant growth.
- Farmers who rely on these products would be directly impacted since the regulation affecting them changes.
- With biostimulants exempt from certain regulations, the likelihood of their increased usage might impact crop yield and cost effectiveness for farmers worldwide.
- Agricultural stakeholders, including biostimulant manufacturers, distributors, and suppliers, would be influenced by this legislation through changes in business operations and market strategies.
- The bill indirectly affects consumers globally by potentially altering agricultural practices and crop availability, possibly impacting food prices.
- The bill's requirement for a study by the Department of Agriculture might lead to improvements and innovations in biostimulant usage affecting global agricultural practices.
Reasoning
- The Plant Biostimulant Act of 2022 primarily impacts those within the agricultural industry, including farmers and biostimulant manufacturers and distributors, due to the deregulation that could increase biostimulant use.
- With the budget constraints, it's important to simulate interviews mostly with individuals within the agricultural sector who will be directly affected by the changes.
- Including a few interviews with individuals who are indirectly impacted or not impacted at all will provide a balanced view.
- Farmers of different scales (small, medium, large) and crop types should be included to see diverse effects.
- Biostimulant producers will be affected by the deregulation which may open up new opportunities; however, it might also come with some challenges related to competition and market change.
- The consumers' wellbeing is indirectly tied to these changes as agricultural outputs potentially affect food prices and availability.
Simulated Interviews
Large-scale corn farmer (Iowa)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think deregulating biostimulants will reduce my operation costs.
- I'm concerned about the potential long-term environmental impacts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Small organic farmer (California)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though I support reduced regulations, I fear increased reliance on biostimulants might undermine organic certification standards.
- I'm hopeful the USDA study will provide better guidelines for organic farmers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Biostimulant manufacturer (New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This legislation could expand our market significantly.
- However, the increased competition might pressure profits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Agricultural research scientist (Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm excited about the USDA's involvement in studying biostimulants.
- There's potential for research breakthroughs improving agricultural efficiency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Wheat farmer (Kansas)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The exclusion from regulations might initially help with cost, but I worry biostimulants could harm soil health in the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Horticulturalist (Florida)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see opportunities for expanding my practices using less regulated products.
- However, I worry about maintaining environmental sustainability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Supply chain manager for biostimulants (Ohio)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Deregulation might streamline certain processes for us.
- I’m cautious about potential disruptions with increased demand.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
IT consultant for agricultural firms (Washington)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change could increase demand for IT services to manage new biostimulant behaviors.
- I'm curious about how tech will adapt to these agricultural changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Environmental advocate (Michigan)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I’m worried deregulating biostimulants might lead to unintended environmental consequences.
- Hope the USDA study addresses these potential risks.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Biostimulant distributor (Georgia)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Reducing these regulatory constraints could expand our market reach.
- Risk of quickly changing market dynamics must be managed wisely.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- USDA's effectiveness and efficiency in conducting the study are crucial for achieving potential benefits.
- The bill's impact on biostimulant market dynamics could change depending on additional environmental regulations or state-level policies.
- Consumer acceptance and perception of biostimulant products may affect their market penetration and overall impact.
- Potential shifts in global biostimulant market dynamics as a result of U.S. policy changes.