Bill Overview
Title: Agriculture Innovation Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Department of Agriculture to identify, collect, link, and analyze certain data regarding the impact of conservation practices and other production practices on farm, ranch, and other working land profitability, including the effect on enhancing crop yields, soil health, ecosystem services, and other risk-reducing factors.
Sponsors: Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved in agriculture globally
Estimated Size: 3400000
- The bill involves conservation practices and production practices, which are primarily relevant to individuals involved in agriculture.
- It specifically targets farms, ranches, and other working lands, which suggests the main population affected consists of farmers and ranchers.
- As it relates to profitability, the economic wellbeing of these individuals will be directly impacted.
- Other beneficiaries of the bill could be secondary stakeholders such as agricultural advisors, environmental agencies, and possibly consumers due to potential changes in agricultural practices and outputs.
Reasoning
- The Agriculture Innovation Act of 2022 targets individuals primarily involved in agriculture, including farmers and ranchers.
- Given the constraints of the budget and target population, impact distribution will vary, with some individuals feeling a greater effect than others.
- The policy focuses on gathering data and analyzing its effects on profitability, crop yields, and environmental impact, which will directly influence practitioners in the agricultural field.
- Individuals involved in conventional farming practices might experience transitional challenges, while those already adopting innovative practices may find more support.
- Secondary impacts may be evident through employment generated by data collection and analysis activities or by improved agricultural practices.
Simulated Interviews
Corn Farmer (Iowa)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Excited to see how conservation data can improve yields.
- Concerned about additional data collection burdens.
- Hopeful for increased profitability through better soil health.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Rancher (California)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could offer validation to conservation practices we're already using.
- Worried about potential costs or changes it could impose.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Soybean Farmer (Nebraska)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Not convinced that government data programs will make a real difference.
- Worry about bureaucracy more than actual help.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Organic Farm Owner (Texas)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Very supportive of the policy.
- Excited to see growth in sustainable practices and validation of organics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Wheat Farmer (Kansas)
Age: 44 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Hopeful that new data can help mitigate climate impact on yields.
- Eager for innovative approaches to increase crop resilience.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Agricultural Scientist (Oregon)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy could provide essential data to support research and innovations.
- Concerned about the integration of data from various sources effectively.
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 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired Farmer (North Dakota)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Interest in seeing technological progresses but skeptical about its impact on traditional practices.
- Believes the policy could offer younger farmers ways to optimize profitability.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Agricultural Advisor (Missouri)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Sees potential for growth in consulting services.
- Enthusiastic about broader implementation of sustainability measures.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Farm Cooperative Manager (New Mexico)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Optimistic that the Act will help cooperatives optimize operations.
- Concern about resource allocation reaching smaller entities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Dairy Farmer (Ohio)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Sees the policy as a potential route to better herd management data.
- Feels cautious about changes in record-keeping or operational hurdles.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 3: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 5: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 100: $1000000 (Low: $800000, High: $1200000)
Key Considerations
- The ability of USDA to manage the scale of data collection and analysis.
- Potential resistance from agricultural stakeholders wary of data privacy and increased monitoring.
- The balance between initial high setup costs and long-term benefits indicated by improved agricultural outcomes.
- Availability of funding and technological resources will influence the effectiveness of the program.