Breaking Ground: Bridging the Gap Between Innovation and Real-World Adoption

Terry Gerton The U.S. Department of Agriculture has just launched a new National Proving Grounds Network for agriculture technology. Tell me what you were hearing from farmers and ranchers that motivated this initiative.

Scott Hutchins Great question. Well, there were a couple of things we not only heard but also observed. Over the past few years, the creation of new innovations and technologies has been booming, and we’re really just at the beginning. So there will be a tremendous number of new innovations and opportunities for farmers and ranchers to consider. But unlike many of our past innovations, whether they’re traits or herbicides or insecticides, which are highly regulated, farmers traditionally would get to see those work in the field for multiple years before they ever had a chance to purchase them. So by the time they’re ready to be purchased, they know what they do, how they’ll fit on their farm, and they know everything about them. In this new digital ag and ag tech world, it’s largely unregulated, which is a good thing. But what that means is there needs to be some guidance and some opportunity for our farmers and ranchers to understand what these technologies can offer them so they know how to make smart investments with their capital and how they might choose the ones that work best for them on their farm or ranch. So what we see is a slow adoption rate because of that uncertainty. And what we are all about is trying to reduce the risk, if you will, of not knowing what the technologies can do so they’ll feel comfortable that whatever investment they make will help them with their farm or ranch and its productivity.

Terry Gerton You mentioned at the beginning traits and herbicides, things we can imagine we would understand, like how tall a corn stalk grows or how fat a pig gets. Herbicides we’re familiar with. But what kind of things are we talking about when you say digital agricultural technology?

Scott Hutchins Certainly. Well, we are in the process of developing a whole range of transformational goals, as we refer to them. Some you might recognize, and we already have a bit of a start as U.S. Agriculture on some of these. But you might think about very precise spraying of weeds, not spraying the crop, but spraying the weeds. So imagine, and there’ll be multiple ways to do this, but for example, there are technologies already that they call see and spray, where the sensors can actually identify the weed and only spray the areas where the weeds are. So that is one area in weed management, a next generation of weed management. There are also technologies where we can do what I refer to as digital scouting. So instead of having an individual walk a field and try to identify where the insects are or where the crop disease is, we can actually do that from a drone and be able to specifically understand what the infestation or infections are. There are also technologies being developed for precision nutrition of crops. So you can imagine a scenario where a device identifies exactly what the soil needs in terms of NPK and maybe some micronutrients, and then at the back end of that tractor, that device actually puts that into the ground right where it’s needed. Similarly, with specialty crops, there are a number of opportunities to do automated harvesting, automated processing, automated food safety evaluations. All of these things are possible with the technologies we have, but they just need to be put together in a way that they clearly fit into a farmer-rancher’s operation. And for animal agriculture, there’s continuous health monitoring, geofencing done remotely, all of the things we can now do with satellite technology and so forth to move animals to the most protein-rich farmland or grassland, if you will. So these are just some of the early transformational concepts. It’s really as wide as the imagination as we move forward. And every time we develop new capabilities, we have an opportunity to expand that imagination to new solutions for our farmers and ranchers.

Terry Gerton I can imagine there’s a lot of interest here, but those all sound really expensive to me. So is part of the purpose of the proving ground a little cost-benefit analysis here to say, it may cost you this much to buy that technology, but here’s the savings down the road?

Scott Hutchins Great question. Well, actually, I think the jury’s out on how expensive they’ll be. And the reason why is because the biggest expense for most of the technologies we’re used to is the regulatory expense and the timeline that goes with that. So if it takes 10 years to develop a product, there’s a lot of sunk cost in that which is ultimately recovered on the farm. In these technologies, because they’re not regulated, actually, while some of the upfront development may be a bit expensive to start, really, if you think about the journey of getting to market, there’s an opportunity to recover that more quickly. But having said that, I think the gist of your question is basically, why will farmers look at this as a positive for them? Part of the proving ground concept is not just the technical characterization of the technology, but it’s also the return on investment. So we’ll be carefully trying to understand what it is if you apply this treatment or if you do this process over a certain area, 20 acres, 40 acres or whatever. This is what we would expect to be the variable cost for that. So you can now compare weed management in the traditional way to weed management in this proposed way and the various tools that you’re evaluating. So this is all about, and this is really emanating from our number one priority in USDA in this mission area, and that is to help farms and ranches become more profitable. And that’s why we think this technology and this innovation is going to be a real key contributor to that profitability. So return on investment is really at the core of what we’re trying to demonstrate.

Terry Gerton I’m speaking with Scott Hutchins. He’s under secretary for research, education, and economics and chief scientist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture. So Mr. Hutchins, help us understand exactly how the network will work. It’s going to span farms, ranches, research partners, multiple regions. How will you decide what gets tested and who participates?

Scott Hutchins Great question. We’re right on the front end of that, but there are a couple of components that I think will be pretty core in terms of making the determination. The reason we call it a network is because there are really three factors that come into play. The first is the transformational concept, and I’ve kind of shared with you what some of those examples are. The next would be what is the crop or the market application for that? So you might think, for example, digital scouting in cotton. Right? Cotton is traditionally scouted. It’s a professional service that almost all cotton producers use. So the digital scouting application in cotton. Well, the third piece

Scott Hutchins So, where exactly will these evaluations take place, and what does this network look like? Naturally, it will be built on cotton. We’ll collaborate with the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) to create grant programs. This will allow us to receive proposals from land-grant institutions regarding potential testing sites, how the trials will be organized, and other related aspects. The specific study designs and protocols will originate from a central location within the USDA to ensure we can gather and consolidate the data effectively and provide unified feedback. Another crucial element for us is the need for a highly professional and networked project management office. We’ve partnered with the Grand Farm in North Dakota to provide this capability. They are exceptionally qualified and already deeply embedded in the startup and agricultural technology sectors. They will consistently manage many of the details involved in building that network. The USDA, with the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) at the forefront, will lead the overall initiative. And, as I mentioned, we’ll use NIFA to ensure all our land-grant institutions are included and integrated into the network. The network will start small, as we must first establish our own proving ground. However, as we gain knowledge and understand how to make this efficient and effective, we’ll expand rapidly, routinely developing and executing against those priorities.

Terry Gerton It sounds like you’ll be testing these new technologies in real-world agricultural settings, not some hypothetical test bed farm in a remote location. How are you setting up guardrails so that the innovation can move forward without putting producers or public confidence at risk?

Scott Hutchins Yes, first, let me confirm you are absolutely right. These evaluations will occur in real-world situations and actual growing locations to ensure they are relevant and credible. We will also work closely with farmers and ranchers to understand their criteria for success and ensure our protocols and approaches align with their needs. This is a key component to ensure it remains real-world focused. Additionally, as I hinted earlier, we will operate in a pre-commercial mode. Many of these innovative startup companies are based on the East or West Coasts; they are brilliant individuals with brilliant ideas, but they may not fully understand the practical application in agriculture. So, if they are interested, we will work with them in a pre-commercial capacity to help them reach the finish line. We will pair them with researchers at land-grant institutions or through the Agricultural Research Service, or other entities, to help them develop their products. Ultimately, our goal is to get the best products into the hands of our farmers and ranchers so they benefit first and benefit the most.