Refocusing the Farm Bill on Results
The federal government spends over $5 billion a year on US Department of Agriculture conservation programs. What are we getting for all that money?
Did You Know?
Why It Matters
USDA’s primary mechanism for conservation is sharing a portion of the estimated cost of defined practices. This “practice-based conservation” means that farmers are given routes to choose rather than destinations to reach. Taxpayers cover a portion of the expected cost of traveling those prescribed routes–even if the farmer knows there’s a better way to get there. An alternative is to focus not on how the results are achieved but to pay based on evidence of success, such as tons of sediment prevented from entering waterways or acre-feet of water saved: “outcomes-based conservation”.
For decades, we’ve known that taking a more outcomes-based, market-based approach to conservation–paying farmers for conservation more like they’re paid for corn–could be twice as cost-effective. Trailblazers, including EPIC, have demonstrated that the Regional Conservation Partnership Program can do this. But with this being only 1% of one program’s awards, there exists lots of room to expand.
Our Way Forward
We are working to make the Farm Bill dollars go further, faster. To do that, we collaborate with program administrators and legislators to reorient conservation programs towards outcomes, cut green tape, and create on-ramps for innovation. In pursuit of more outcomes-based conservation, we help Congress change the underlying authorizations, research ways to adjust administrative procedures, and highlight examples of outcomes-based conservation in action.
