The remaining months of 2023 are certain to be eventful on Capitol Hill. Headlined by a potential government shutdown and with the 2024 elections looming, the most impactful legislative development very well may be 2023 Farm Bill negotiations, and whether Congress follows through on the historic $20 billion investment for on-farm conservation provided by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in 2022.
The potentially $1 trillion Farm Bill will cover everything from commodity pricing and nutrition programs for low-income Americans to federal loan programs for farmers. Unlike previous farm bills, however, the 2023 version has the potential to dramatically enhance how farmers, foresters, landowners, and ranchers practice conservation and empower American agriculture to adapt to a rapidly changing climate.
The Farm Bill’s Conservation section, Title II, funds and directs a series of on-the-ground programs, which provide crucial financial and technical assistance to farmers, landowners, ranchers, and foresters to meet wildlife and natural resource goals. These voluntary and incentive-based programs have been incredibly popular, to the point that nationally, as many as 75% of qualified applicants are turned away from some programs. The Inflation Reduction Act can close that gap, meeting producers’ demand for more conservation.
As negotiations ramp up, Congress’ priority in Title II should be to protect and even build on the $20 billion investment, full-stop. Lawmakers made a promise to America’s farmers, ranchers, and rural communities last year. They have no excuse to back away now.
Once full funding is secured, it’s critical that Congress ensure that every dollar is spent as effectively as possible. To do so will require some tweaks to the program that got the largest relative funding increase and $5 billion total, through the IRA: the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP).
Administered by the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), RCPP works a little differently from other farm bill conservation programs. Rather than having farmers and ranchers apply directly for funding, NRCS selects project proposals submitted from conservation partners, who work with farmers and ranchers on specific projects.
Traditionally, there have been two types of funding opportunities under RCPP: Classic, where NRCS administers the funding to complete conservation while the lead partner oversees technical assistance to support conservation; and Alternative Funding Arrangements, where the lead partner directly funds producers’ innovative projects and approaches that would not be possible under RCPP Classic.
Both versions of RCPP leverage the relationships and regional knowledge of local partners to engage producers who might otherwise not participate in a conservation program.
Unfortunately, in its eight-year history, RCPP has been dogged by complaints that the program is overly-bureaucratic, restrictive, and slow. While USDA has begun a helpful process of administrative improvements, Congressional direction for increased flexibility and speed will dramatically improve RCPP’s capacity and ability to swiftly meet natural resource concerns.
A few common-sense reforms are needed to improve program delivery. First, NRCS should address the unfortunate reality that RCPP contracts require complicated, redundant negotiations that delay projects by years. In a hearing in April, Senator Michael Bennett (D-CO) highlighted producers in his district waiting two years to start a project after USDA formally announced their RCPP award; this is not unusual but it should be unacceptable. In addition to requiring NRCS to complete contracts within a set time, Congress should allow partners to recoup reasonable administrative expenses incurred, including prior to contract execution.
Within RCPP Classic, Congress should reinstate the ability to contract RCPP under the existing authorities of popular conservation programs like EQIP. This would improve administrative efficiency and reduce confusion.
Don't miss a beat! Sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse news! For the latest on what’s happening in agriculture in Washington, D.C. and around the country, click here.
Beyond addressing these logistical changes, the 2023 Farm Bill can greatly amplify RCPP’s $5 billion by further supporting outcomes-based conservation, also known as performance-based or Pay for Success contracting. Most USDA programs cover part of farmers’ costs for implementing conservation practices, such as planting cover crops. Outcomes-based conservation rewards farmers for achieving a desired result, such as paying a set amount for each ton of carbon sequestered in soil or nitrogen prevented from entering a stream. USDA economists and our own research show this can be dramatically more cost-effective. Congress directed RCPP to prioritize innovative “outcomes-based” projects in the last Farm Bill but didn’t give it a clear pathway to do so. A few tweaks could provide a stronger structure for RCPP to be the flexible venue for outcomes-based conservation to meet climate and wildlife goals.
The Inflation Reduction Act is the largest investment in on-farm conservation since the Dust Bowl. Now, as Congress negotiates the details of the 2023 Farm Bill, it’s crucial that Members listen to farmers by ensuring the $20 billion for climate-smart agriculture remain intact and by refine RCPP.
Congress made a promise to deliver on this once-in-a-generation opportunity to fundamentally improve conservation across the country – now it’s time to follow through.
Harry Huntley is the Senior Agriculture Policy Analyst at the Environmental Policy Innovation Center where he develops easier, cheaper, faster ways for governments to pay farmers who improve natural resources. He holds degrees in economics and agricultural science from the University of Maryland, College Park and has worked for a variety of conservation and agriculture organizations at the local and national level. Harry can be reached at HHuntley@policyinnovation.org.
For more ag news and opinions, visit Agri-Pulse.com.
