6 MAY 2011 VOL 332 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org 670 POLICYFORUM A griculture in the United States and many other countries is at a criti- cal juncture. Public investments and policy reforms will inform landscape man- agement practices to be used by farmers and ranchers for sustaining food and ecosystem security. Although U.S. farms have provided growing supplies of food and other products, they have also been major contributors to global greenhouse gases, biodiversity loss, natural resource degradation, and public health problems ( 1). Farm productivity and economic viability are vulnerable to resource scarcities, climate change, and market vola- tility ( 2). Concerns about long-term sustain- ability have promoted interest in new forms of agriculture that (i) enhance the natural- resource base and environment, (ii) make farming financially viable, and (iii) contrib- ute to the well-being of farmers, farm work- ers, and rural communities, while still (iv) providing abundant, affordable food, feed, fiber, and fuel. A 2010 report by the U.S. National Research Council (NRC) ( 1) identified numer- ous examples of innovative farming sys- tems that contribute to multiple sustainabil- ity goals but noted they are not widespread. This report joins others [e.g., ( 3– 6)] critical of aspects of mainstream, conventional farm- ing systems. We argue that the slow expan- sion of such innovative farming systems in the United States is as much a policy and market problem as a science and technology problem. Incentives for appropriate markets, reform of U.S. farm-related policies, and reorientation of publicly funded agricultural science are needed to hasten implementation of more sus- tainable agricultural systems. Incremental, Transformative Approaches To improve sustainability of U.S. agriculture, the NRC report proposes both incremental and transformative approaches. The former are practices and technologies that address specific production or environmental con- cerns associated with mainstream, conven- tional farming systems. Examples include 2-year crop rotations, precision agriculture using geospatial technologies that describe field variation, classically bred or geneti- cally engineered crops, and reduced or no tillage. Although incremental approaches offer improvements and should be continued, in aggregate, they are inadequate to address multiple sustainability concerns. In contrast, the transformative approach builds on an understanding of agriculture as a complex socioecological system. Trans- formative change looks to whole-system redesign rather than single technological improvements. Examples of such innovative systems make up a modest, but growing, component of U.S. agriculture and include organic farming, alternative livestock pro- duction (e.g., grass-fed), mixed-crop and livestock systems, and perennial grains ( 1). Such systems integrate production, envi- ronmental, and socioeconomic objectives; reflect greater awareness of ecosystem ser- vices; and capitalize on synergies between complementary farm enterprises, such as between crop and livestock production. The existence of innovative agricultural systems in the United States suggests that technical obstacles are not the greatest bar- rier. Rather, change is hindered by market structures, policy incentives, and uneven development and availability of scientific information that guide farmers’ decisions (see the figure). Market Structures Most U.S. farmers sell products to a highly consolidated global agri-food industry rewarding primarily the provision of large volumes of low-cost food, feed, fiber, and fuel, often constrained by contract require- ments of food processors and retailers. Meanwhile, consumer food consumption habits associated with modern life-styles have sustained mainstream farming systems and food markets and have contributed to a national obesity and health crisis. Part of transforming U.S. agriculture is educating more consumers to take responsibility for what they eat and how much they eat ( 7). Consumer demand is also growing for more environmental and social accountabil- ity from farmers, including considerations of animal welfare, ecosystem services, worker safety and welfare, and resource conserva- tion. In response, “value-added trait” foods and “sustainability brands” have emerged in the marketplace, e.g., U.S. Department of Agriculture Certified Organic and Food Alli- ance Certified. U.S. and global markets for these value-added trait products have driven the spread of local, organic, and grass-fed livestock systems. Market forces could be accelerated through public-policy incentives. Policy Incentives Many international, federal, state, and local agricultural, credit, energy, risk-management, and environmental policies influence farmer decisions (see the figure). A major policy driver for U.S. agriculture is the Farm Bill, tra- ditionally renewed by the U.S. Congress every 4 to 5 years, with the next version expected in 2012. The best-funded provisions of the Farm Bill include financial assistance for low- income families to purchase food; commod- ity subsidies paid to farmers (mostly for corn, cotton, rice, soybeans, and wheat); crop insur- ance and disaster relief; and conservation pro- grams ( 8). Although only roughly a third of U.S. farmers receive commodity or conser- vation payments under the Farm Bill, it has a major influence on what, where, and how food is produced. Most elements of the Farm Bill were not designed to promote sustainability. Subsi- dies are commonly criticized for distorting market incentives and making our food sys- tem overly dependent on a few grain crops mainly used for animal feed and highly processed food, with deleterious effects on the environment and human health ( 9, 10). Redesigning the bill will be a complex undertaking in light of political and budget- ary constraints, as well as knowledge gaps. However, much of the information neces- sary for Farm Bill redesign is available and Transforming U.S. Agriculture AGRICULTURE J. P. Reganold, 1 * D. Jackson-Smith, 2 S. S. Batie, 3 R. R. Harwood, 3 J. L. Kornegay, 4 D. Bucks, 5 C. B. Flora, 6 J. C. Hanson, 7 W. A. Jury, 8 D. Meyer, 9 A. Schumacher Jr., 10 H. Sehmsdorf, 11 C. Shennan, 12 L. A. Thrupp, 13 P. Willis 14 Achieving sustainable agricultural systems will require transformative changes in markets, policies, and science. *Author for correspondence. E-mail: reganold@wsu.edu 1 Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA. 2 Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322, USA. 3 Michi- gan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. 4 North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA. 5 Bucks Natural Resources Management, Elkridge, MD 21075, USA. 6 Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA. 7 University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA. 8 University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA. 9 University of Califor- nia, Davis, CA 95616, USA. 10 SJH and Company, Washing- ton, DC 20007, USA. 11 S&S Homestead Farm, Lopez Island, WA 98261, USA. 12 University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA. 13 Fetzer Vineyards, Hopland, CA 95449, USA. 14 Niman Pork Ranch Company, Thornton, IA 50479, USA. Published by AAAS on May 6, 2011 www.sciencemag.org Downloaded from