Big farms have been cornering a big share of US farmland while many middle level farms are losing out and small and young farmers face increasing difficulties, even as farm workers who make the whole system function remain dangerously exposed and historically marginalized communities continue to lose ground they once held.
Sometimes public attention is focused on the incredibly huge land and farmland ownership of a few extremely rich persons or families. If only farmland is to be examined, then Bill Gates is often considered to be the biggest landowner with about 250,000 acres of farmland spread across about 17 states. There are several others with over 100,000 acres of farmland. However if one also includes those with timber interests or ranches, then landowners of over a million acres are also possible in the USA, with the Emmerson family owning about 2.4 million acres, John Malone about 2.2 million acres and Ted Turner about 2 million acres.
However the wider debate is regarding the extent to which the overall consolidation in favor of big farms is harming the base of ordinary middle-level farmers. A study by the Union of Concerned Scientists titled 'Losing Ground' tried to examine this trend over a 40 year period from 1978 to 2017. For this study, farms of over 1000 acres are considered big farms, those in the range of 50 to 1000 acres are considered middle-level farms, while those below 50 acres are considered small farms. Over the 40 year period this study found that in the big farms category the harvested crops nearly doubled. Mid-sized farms shrunk to almost half their former number and acreage. The number of small farmers increased but their average size was shrinking and the total area of land occupied by small farms decreased. The study concluded that large crop farms are getting larger, small crop farms are getting smaller, and midsize crop farms are disappearing. The number of new farmers was also found to be decreasing, and overall farm acreage declined by nearly 13% in the USA during this period.
While this study brings out the consolidation in favor of big farms, some other factors which have become clearer more recently also need to be examined to better understand the wider change. One important reality is the very low margin at which most farmers are operating. On the one hand this can compel them to follow the "big or bust" logic and try to borrow money to increase the size of farm operations to increase overall earnings. However in view of debt repayments and mounting interest this may further increase their stress and problems, although statistics may show them to be promoted to the big farm category. On the other hand, the increasing problems of middle level farmers may result in loss of some land and they may enter the category of small farmers, thereby also increasing the number of small farmers. At the same time some farmers may simply quit, or be on the verge of quitting, and this is reflected in the increasing number of bankruptcies seen in 2024 and continuing into 2025.
Another important aspect is the decreasing number of new and young farmers. This may be a reflection of the fact that the increasing problems and stress of farmers are discouraging new entrants, and this may deprive the farm sector of new initiatives and innovations in the near future. A farming sector with an increasing proportion of ageing farmers can lose its dynamism. It is also worth noting that a very large number of farmers are in fact cultivating land on a rental basis. While the percentage of such farmland is already high at 39%, the reality is even starker when pastures are excluded and only cropland is considered, at which point about 54% of cropland is cultivated on a rental basis. The problems likely to be faced by rental farmers are higher than those cultivating their own land, as they must pay substantial rent on top of everything else.
The loss of middle level farmers in particular is likely to be very harmful for farming communities and the small town or rural economies supported by the spending of these farmers. Such decline can already be seen in many farming communities and the town and village economies built around them. This is also a national loss, as such farming communities provide a strong base to the country in terms of small town development and the production of essential food and raw materials, while also providing a strong foundation at the social and ethical level.
The Dispossession of Black and Native American Farmers
Yet as damaging as this consolidation has been for ordinary farmers broadly, it has fallen with particular and devastating force on black and Native American farmers, who have faced not only the structural pressures affecting all small farmers but the compounding weight of historical injustice and systemic discrimination. Land reforms are often aimed at providing land to the landless or those who have very little, including those who have suffered from historical injustices. In the USA, however, what has unfolded during the last century is land reform in reverse, as the black population has lost almost 95% of the farmland it once owned.
About a hundred years ago there were about a million black, or African-American, farmers in the USA. Today they have decreased to just around 45,000, one of the steepest declines suffered by any ethnic group anywhere in farming. According to a report of the Union of Concerned Scientists, in 1920 African-American farmers made up 14% of the total number of farmers in the USA; in 2017 they were down to just about 1.6%. This report noted that while this is partly in keeping with the wider trend of land consolidation in favor of big farms, systemic racism has amplified these pressures through discriminatory policies and laws. After 2017 the overall trend of loss of black farmers has continued, despite some encouraging efforts by younger black farmers to enter farming and overcome adversity. Black farmers have land holdings which are less than one-fourth of the average size, so their share of farmland owned is even less. The farmland owned by them is just 0.5%, relative to their share in the population of over 13%. Almost 48% of the farms of black farmers are cattle and dairy farms rather than proper agricultural farms.
The land lost by black farmer households in the USA during the 20th century has been valued at around 326 billion dollars, as estimated by lead author Dr. Dania Frances and co-authors in a paper published by the American Economic Association journal. In comparison, very long drawn out legal cases relating to discriminatory practices against black farmers have resulted in claims of less than 3 billion dollars. Apart from inheritance and land rights issues, black farmers have suffered from discriminatory practices of the US Department of Agriculture in matters relating to credit and technical assistance, and also experience problems and discriminatory behavior when it comes to marketing their produce. According to official statistics provided by the Congressional Research Service paper titled 'Racial Equality in US Farming', the total number of farmers declined during the 20th century by 67%, but the number of black farmers declined by a much higher percentage.
In the case of native farmers who once cultivated all the farmland, the official data tells us that combining American Indians and Alaskan Natives they now have about 7% of the total farmland but only less than 1% of the farm produce sales. Most of this land is held in reserves and tribal trusts, but control of most of it has passed to non-natives, as is evident from the fact that recently the non-natives received 86% of the annual sales receipts from this cropland. Hence there is an urgent need to take important steps for increasing farmland access and control for Native Americans as well.
What is needed is a significantly large and broad-based land reform program distributing farmland among Native Americans and black people, accompanied by financial grants rather than loans for facilitating land cultivation in the early stage. These should be small farms based entirely on natural farming and producing healthy food. Many creative experiments of producing healthy food in ecologically protective ways should be tried, and an agency should be established for this purpose as well as for the purchase of farm produce at a fair price. This would be an important step forward combining the promotion of climate-resilient farming with correcting historical injustices and providing more farming opportunities to those who suffered great injustice earlier. Once this farming with significantly lower economic costs and lower fossil fuel burden starts succeeding on many small farms, many other farmers will be encouraged to take it up, initiating a wider and highly welcome trend towards ecologically protective, climate-resilient, and creative farming. Protective steps will, however, need to be taken toward such farmers to prevent the sabotaging of these initiatives by big business lobbies.
The Forgotten Labor: Farm Workers at the Margins
Running through all of these issues, and often overlooked in discussions that focus on land ownership and farm consolidation, is the condition of the farm workers who actually perform the labor on which the entire agricultural system depends. Farm workers in the USA make a very important contribution to the production of food and other crops, but their welfare concerns are being neglected to a significant extent. These workers have been identified as being exposed to serious health hazards and injury risks in several studies, and despite the fact that occupational hazards and risks are increasing further for these open-air workers in times of climate change, adequate attention to preventing health risks or strengthening compensatory provisions is not being made.
Despite the likelihood of under-reporting, existing data reveal that agriculture has one of the highest rates of worksite injuries and fatalities. A shocking and often cited statistic in the literature on health risks related to agricultural work is that farm workers are 35 times more likely to die from heat-related illness than other workers. While this is not meant to underestimate the heat-related problems faced by some other categories of outdoor workers, it is nevertheless a very disturbing indicator of the health risks facing farm workers at a time of increasing heat stress and heat waves. Several reports have appeared of farm workers continuing to toil for long hours despite being exposed to heat-related health problems. These problems must be understood in the context of the fact that a very large number of farm workers, in fact a majority in many places, are immigrants, and increasingly many of them are being classified as illegal immigrants. This makes their position even more vulnerable than before. Even earlier, immigrant workers in particular found it more difficult to assert their rights, but now this possibility has decreased further. As immigrants they are also more likely to be ignored by the political system and the welfare system. As many immigrant workers come for short durations, they feel compelled to complete assigned work quickly and return home, leading them to go on working even in difficult conditions, sometimes at the cost of their lives.
Farm workers are also exposed to serious health hazards in the course of handling and spraying highly hazardous pesticides and weedicides, some of which have been linked to cancer. Those employed close to wildfires in recent times have also been exposed to excessive smoke, choking conditions, and respiratory ailments, apart from a further increase in heat stress. Earnings of farm workers generally tend to be on the lower side and cannot compensate for the difficulties and risks of their working conditions. It is in fact due to their low earnings that they often agree to work for too long or to work in very difficult and hazardous conditions.
Clearly farm workers deserve much better working conditions in terms of safety, health protection, and earnings. Unfortunately, even such simple steps as ensuring the supply of plenty of cold drinking water and providing rest in shaded and cool conditions have met with resistance in some places. This is very unfortunate, as such neglect increases health risks and even life risks in times of climate change. It will be completely wrong and unfair to take any action against farm workers on the basis of their immigrant identity. It will also be counter-productive, as any action like deportation of many workers will lead to an acute shortage of farm workers, and farming in many parts of the country will be very badly affected. Shortages of farm workers are already reported from some places from time to time.
The Case for Systemic Reform
Taken together, these interlocking crises — the squeezing out of middle-level farmers, the historic dispossession of black and Native American farming communities, and the dangerous exploitation of farm workers — reveal that a country which positions itself as the greatest agricultural power in the world has failed to adopt sincerely protective policies toward most of those who actually make its agriculture work. This has become even more important in times of climate change, as farmers and farm workers alike face increasing problems due to adverse and erratic weather conditions. Not just minor reforms but big and systemic reforms are needed: reforms that protect farmers and farming communities, correct historical injustices, and ensure the welfare, safety, and dignity of the farm workers without whom none of the fields could be cultivated at all.
---
*The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, A Day in 2071, and Man over Machine
Comments