Bill Overview
Title: Farmland Security Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to submit to Congress an annual report on foreign investments in agricultural land in the United States, including a description of the impact that foreign ownership of agricultural land has on family farms, rural communities, and the domestic food supply. USDA must also establish a public database that contains data from each report submitted.
Sponsors: Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI]
Target Audience
Population: People reliant on stable agricultural systems and rural communities
Estimated Size: 100000000
- The bill focuses on foreign investments in US agricultural land, thus it affects individuals involved in the agricultural sector.
- Family farms are highlighted, as their stability and operations might be impacted by foreign ownership.
- Rural communities are directly involved since agricultural land is often located in these areas and can influence the local economy.
- The domestic food supply is a concern, as foreign ownership could potentially affect national food security.
Reasoning
- The population affected by the Farmland Security Act of 2022 includes those directly involved in agriculture. The American target estimate involves about 100 million people, as it impacts agricultural workers, rural communities, family farms, and the food supply chain.
- The Cantril wellbeing scores help estimate the psychological and experiential impact of policy changes on individuals. These scores serve as a scorecard for comparing life evaluation with and without the policy.
- Given the budget, the policy must focus on gathering and processing data on foreign investments for transparency, affecting those directly connected to agricultural land.
- A range of people from farm owners to local community members need representation to measure expectations about life with the policy.
Simulated Interviews
Family Farm Owner (Iowa)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about foreign investors driving up land prices.
- The transparency sounds useful for ensuring fair land prices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
Agricultural Policy Analyst (Nebraska)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy provides data necessary for understanding market dynamics.
- Public database could mitigate misinformation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Commercial Farm Investor (California)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't expect much change from this policy as long as I'm informed.
- It's good to have data to optimize investment opportunities.
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 |
Rural Community Leader (Texas)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could empower local communities to challenge unsuitable foreign sales.
- Knowledge is power in protecting our community's interests.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Urban Agritech Entrepreneur (New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy impacts traditional farming more than urban farming.
- Could inspire more projects to track resource use.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Food Supply Chain Manager (Georgia)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Foreign land ownership could complicate supply chains.
- The policy helps track potential supply disruptions.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Wheat Farmer (Kansas)
Age: 61 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy might provide leverage in land negotiations.
- Foreign influence makes family farms feel endangered.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Agricultural Scientist (Arkansas)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to data is crucial for sustainable transition strategies.
- The policy's database could enhance research velocity.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Rural Development Officer (Montana)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy can guide better infrastructure development decisions.
- Transparency could prevent misinvestment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Environmental Activist (Vermont)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy promotes transparency in foreign environmental impacts.
- Local ecological concerns might be better addressed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $8000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $12000000)
Year 2: $8000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $8000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $12000000)
Year 5: $8000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $12000000)
Year 10: $8000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $12000000)
Year 100: $8000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $12000000)
Key Considerations
- The policy primarily aids in collecting and disseminating information rather than enacting regulatory changes, which limits its immediate economic impact.
- Its success largely depends on the effective implementation, management, and accessibility of the public database.
- Long-term impacts are more related to policy adjustments informed by increased transparency and data insights.