Bill Overview
Title: To amend the Food, Agriculture, and Trade Act of 1990 to establish a grant program for eligible institutions to carry out agriculture workforce training programs, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill directs the National Institute of Food and Agriculture to establish a grant program within its Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program for eligible institutions to develop and carry out agriculture workforce training programs to (1) promote the growth of the agriculture industry, (2) foster competitiveness within the industry, and (3) improve the training and retention of workers in the agriculture industry. The program must be implemented by January 31, 2024.
Sponsors: Rep. Emmer, Tom [R-MN-6]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or reliant on the agriculture industry worldwide
Estimated Size: 22000000
- The bill is designed to impact the agriculture industry workforce.
- This includes current and prospective farmers, ranchers, and agricultural workers who will benefit from improved training and retention efforts.
- The growth and competitiveness of the agriculture industry affect a wide range of people, including those indirectly involved, such as suppliers, consumers, and related industries.
- Educational institutions that offer agricultural education and training programs will also be directly involved and impacted.
- The food supply chain and its stability may indirectly impact global food security and pricing.
Reasoning
- The policy targets educational improvements for agricultural workers, farmers, and ranchers, intending to enhance skills and retention.
- Potential beneficiaries range from those directly involved in agriculture to educational institutions offering relevant programs.
- Impact varies, with some benefiting from better job security or career advancement through improved skills, while others may see minimal changes.
- Budget and duration limit the program, implying initial impact might not be universal, becoming broader over time as more institutions and workers get involved.
Simulated Interviews
Farmer (Iowa)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the policy provides more access to advanced training.
- Practical skill development would be beneficial for sustainable farming.
- A concern is whether funds will be equitably distributed among small and large farms.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Agricultural laborer (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be a chance to improve skills beyond manual labor.
- Training might lead to better job stability and opportunities for advancement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Rancher (Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More training on modern techniques can enhance productivity.
- Worries about the availability of programs tailored to specific needs like cattle ranching.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Agriculture professor (Kentucky)
Age: 56 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The funding could lead to more research grants and resources at our institution.
- I'm optimistic about the potential to update curriculum with cutting-edge practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Seed supplier (Nebraska)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might indirectly increase demand for high-quality seeds as farms modernize.
- Concerned about possible focus on larger commercial farms over smaller ones.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Agriculture studies student (Florida)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could offer more hands-on internship and learning opportunities.
- Hope it lowers barriers to entry for new folks in the industry.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Agricultural economist (Minnesota)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could reshape workforce capabilities if implemented well.
- Focus must be on long-term impacts, not just short-term gains.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Retired agri-business owner (North Carolina)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful that this will spark renewed interest in agriculture careers among the youth.
- Sustainable practices should be emphasized in training programs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Agricultural policy analyst (Kansas)
Age: 42 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy aligns with needed reform in workforce training.
- Success hinges on proper implementation and monitoring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Urban farm coordinator (New York)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Opportunity to expand urban agriculture as part of training initiatives.
- Ensuring urban areas are included in the program is a concern.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $120000000)
Year 2: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 3: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 5: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 10: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- The program must be swiftly implemented, potentially requiring additional administrative infrastructure.
- The availability and readiness of educational institutions to participate in the program could significantly affect its success.
- Compliance with existing federal guidelines and state-level agency coordination.
- Assessment and evaluation frameworks to measure the impact of training programs.
- Securing long-term funding to ensure sustained progress.