Can "Hippie Farms" Make a Difference?

A couple of weeks ago I had a conversation with a colleague in the agriculture technology space that I really respect. We got into a discussion about where change can be created in the agricultural supply chain. They argued that if I wanted to create real change then the only area of focus where an impact can be made is transforming the large-scale commodity agriculture system. 

“Working on supporting hippie farms makes such a small difference that it’s not worth your time if you want to make an impact in transforming our agriculture system.”

While I was traveling, working on farms I had the chance to immerse myself in different types of agriculture. Nothing can replace the learning of actually getting my hands dirty.

The topic of this conversation is actually something I have thought a lot about over the past year as I have spent more time working on small diversified farms and taken on projects working on agriculture businesses solving problems outside of the commodity supply chain. This chat was definitely not the first time that I’ve had a conversation that follows a similar path. They always follow the same storyline: if you want to create real change, then you have to work on changing the dominating commodity system. Grassroots and community level agriculture is such a small portion of the market that it is not even worth your attention.

On the flip side of the coin, I have had conversations with many colleagues working on small diversified farms and building local food systems that also follow a pretty predictable storyline. In these conversations, mouths drop at the thought of working with companies like Bayer (formerly Monsanto) or Syngenta. These companies are “big ag”, the big bad guys of agriculture, and nothing good can come from working with these multinational companies. The view of many of these small diversified farmers and organizations supporting local food is that anything to do with the dominating, commodity agriculture system is the enemy.

Working in the agtech space, I was used to giant planters and combines used for planting and harvest. Pictured above is me planting a market garden using a very different planter than I was used to seeing.

One of the opportunities of working on both sides of the table is that it helps me keep perspective and understanding of both viewpoints. I do believe that we need to move away from large commodity agriculture, and one of the best ways to do that is to focus on growing at the community level. I also recognize that if we were to completely stop commodity agricultural production today, we would not have enough food to feed our country, and we would not have enough farmers to manage small-scale diversified farms. U.S. farmers and ranchers make up just 1.3% of the labor force, whereas in the 1840s, more than 80% of the population was working in agriculture. If we decided to stop commodity production tomorrow, the current knowledge and infrastructure for this new food economy would not support such a transition. 

Also, what about all of the farmers and ranchers scattered throughout the U.S. that have been on their family’s original homestead for generations? These farmers that are currently growing crops for commodity production are not the “bad guys.” They simply have been corralled into a certain way of farming because of the infrastructure that has been built up over decades by large agribusinesses, our government, and society at large. Many of these farmers with whom I speak on a regular basis are trying to do right by their land, their business, and their families, but also don’t see a path out of their corn and soybean rotation because the only markets available to them are the local grain elevators or ethanol plants that accept commodity crops. And what about the capital tied up in large machinery, infrastructure, and inputs? The thought of doing anything different seems like an insurmountable hurdle when farmers are barely breaking even and struggling to stay in business in today’s farm economy. 

Where do we go from here? 

In my opinion, only slightly changing commodity agriculture practices is not going to be good enough to continue farming into perpetuity. An agricultural system that relies on synthetic fertilizer and pesticides, as well as large mono-cropped farms, is not sustainable in the long term. Even with the huge opportunity for improvements and lessened environmental impact through precision technology solutions, I simply don’t think it is enough to get our soil health back to where it needs to be. In the U.S., the soil on agricultural land is eroding 10 x faster than it is being replenished. We need soil to grow nutritious food for a growing population. I don’t think that the infrastructure of our current commodity system can continue if we want to transition to a food production system that is actually regenerative.

Many small diversified operations combine crops with poultry or livestock. In a regenerative farming system animals play an incredibly important role in improving and maintaining soil health.

At this moment, we cannot abandon either commodity crop agriculture or the growing resurgence of small diversified farming operations that are growing food for their local communities. A transition to a future agriculture system that meets the challenges presented by a changing climate, a growing population, and soil degradation will require innovation on both sides of the table. We need thinkers, doers, innovators, and farmers simultaneously focusing on building up our local food economies and helping commodity U.S. farmers and ranchers transition their operations to new growing practices that account for the challenges of tomorrow.

Some promising initiatives are happening at both the large and small scale that gives me optimism about our future food system. On small diversified farms, more and more new and beginning farmer training groups are popping up. New funding options are emerging and more consumers are putting an emphasis on purchasing fresh, locally grown food. On the commodity agriculture side,  additional research is helping farmers diversify their crop mix away from just the one to two commodity crops they have depended on for decades. Also, a number of players that recognize the important role that agricultural policy can play in facilitating a change are helping farmers and ranchers stay in business and adopt crops and practices that are better for their land while remaining economically sustainable.

My take on this question - “Can hippie farms create change?”

Absolutely. “Hippie Farms” need to be given more credit. They shouldn’t be discounted as “hippie farms.” Many of these small diversified operations are growing food directly for consumers, restaurants, and grocery stores. These farms have real business plans and opportunities to play star roles in their local food economies. These are the farms that I believe are going to be essential players in our new food economy.

Yes. Small diversified farms matter a lot! But we also need to learn to create dialogue between different players across the agricultural supply chain. I don’t think that conversations with the one-sided approach are productive. We need to also innovate, communicate, and work within the existing commodity crop agriculture system to help transition U.S. agricultural land to support an agricultural production that works economically and ecologically.