Bill Overview
Title: A bill to amend the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 to authorize grants 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: Sen. Smith, Tina [D-MN]
Target Audience
Population: People working in or joining workforce in agriculture industry globally
Estimated Size: 3400000
- The bill is focused on developing agriculture workforce training programs.
- It will impact future and current workers in the agriculture industry through improved training and retention.
- Training institutions will be responsible for implementing the programs, so they are a part of the target population as facilitators.
- Farmers and ranchers, especially those classified as beginning farmers and ranchers, are an indirect target as the bill aims to strengthen the overall agricultural sector.
- The agriculture industry is globally distributed, having significant presence in countries with large agricultural outputs, such as India, China, and the USA.
Reasoning
- The target population – those who will be trained or impacted by the improved workforce conditions – is huge, but the policy's direct impact may be focused more on areas with more training centers.
- There will be a range of beneficiaries, from those directly involved in agricultural labor to educators and potential new entries into the farming sector.
- The policy may most impact youth or others interested in transitioning into agriculture or related fields.
- While the direct impact on established farmers might be smaller, the long-term sustainability and competitiveness of the sector benefits everyone involved.
- Most interventions take time to manifest in wellbeing metrics; long-term benefits are more palpable.
Simulated Interviews
Agricultural Worker (Fresno, California)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm excited about any chance to learn new skills that keep me competitive.
- If the training includes modern equipment, that would be amazing.
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 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Rancher (Des Moines, Iowa)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this brings more enthusiastic workers to the ranching sector.
- I'm apprehensive about whether the grants will actually reach small scale operations.
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 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Agricultural Educator (Montgomery, Alabama)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could bolster our programming significantly, allowing for more comprehensive courses.
- I'm worried about the bureaucracy slowing down fund disbursement.
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 |
University Student in Agricultural Sciences (Austin, Texas)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy sounds like a great opportunity for students like me.
- I'm eager to join the workforce with additional skills offered by the program.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Corn Farmer (Bloomington, Illinois)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support anything that helps bring young workers onto the farms.
- The policy might not impact me directly but could help the industry long-term.
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 (Atlanta, Georgia)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful this initiative will address critical skill gaps in our sector.
- Ensuring equitable access to training programs is key.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Dairy Producer (Madison, Wisconsin)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see potential in this initiative to bring much-needed skilled labor into the dairy industry.
- The challenge will be in adapting training specifically to dairy needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Agricultural Equipment Technician (Orlando, Florida)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More training programs mean more demand for tech savvy workers too.
- I'm excited about the technology advancements that could come with better training.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Intern in Urban Agriculture (Denver, Colorado)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Programs like this could really expand urban agriculture initiatives.
- Reaching urban populations with agricultural training is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Food Technology Consultant (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improved training can lead to better food technology integration in agriculture.
- I see room for growth if training covers tech innovations.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 3: $25000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $30000000)
Year 5: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The quick implementation timeline necessitates rapid program development and resource allocation.
- The reach of the program depends on its ability to adequately support a diverse range of agricultural training institutions.
- The indirect economic benefits such as enhanced productivity and global competitiveness should be factored into long-term policy assessments.