As we noted in our post last week, precision agriculture is changing the face of farming. The use of technologies such as sensors, robotics, satellites, and drones enables the collection of massive amounts of data to help guide operational decision-making.
Using agricultural technology (agtech) to gain real-time insights has been a game changer for farmers who previously relied on experience and instinct to run their operations. Now, they can rely on objective data and related analysis when making key decisions to address various needs.
But what about all valuable data? Who owns it, and who has what rights to do what with it? It originates from the farmer’s resources — whether that be land, crops, or livestock — but it’s collected by various agtech providers who some experts say may be tempted to use it in ways beyond what farmers intend.
That agtech data conundrum
In its recent report, Precision Agriculture: Benefits and Challenges for Technology Adoption and Use, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) cited “farm data sharing and ownership issues” as one of the potential challenges to broader adoption of agtech.
“Concerns regarding farm data sharing and ownership can pose obstacles to the widespread use of AI [artificial intelligence] in agriculture,” the GAO said.
Though the use of AI is specified there, others have expressed a growing concern about who owns the data being generated from these various technologies — and what’s being done with it.
Citing Bill Oemichen, a former deputy Minnesota agriculture commissioner, in an article for Business Insider, writer Sabina Wex notes that while farmers can use the data for their own needs, the agtech companies can “monetize it to sell products to farmers, such as herbicides and pesticides, as well as collect data on farmland for hedge funds and investors.”
“The data has become more valuable than the underlying products and services that they’re selling to the producers,” Oemichen reportedly said.
How ADT is helping protect farmers’ interests
The Ag Data Transparency Evaluator, Inc. (ADT) is a non-profit with its roots in a movement that began in 2014 when the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) realized that many of its farmer-members were “concerned about the variety of new ag data products that were arriving on the market” and how their data would be used. As a result, AFBF hosted a series of meetings with representatives of other interested farm groups that had similar concerns — as well as various ag tech providers.
Eventually, the group drafted The Privacy and Security Principles for Farm Data — now referred to as ag data’s Core Principles — which “represented basic guidelines that ag tech providers should be following when collecting, using, storing, and transferring farmers’ ag data.”
Although 37 companies signed on and agreed to incorporate the Core Principles into their contracts with farmers after they were initially published, the AFBF recognized the need for a third party to verify compliance. As a result, it joined with other interested organizations to form ADT, which audits companies’ ag data contracts and developed the Ag Data Transparent seal of approval — which “recognizes compliance with ag data’s Core Principles.”
Ag data’s Core Principles
Ag data’s Core Principles have provided a solid foundation to help protect farmers’ interests for many years and were updated in 2024 by ADT members.
According to ADT, the organization “updated these core principles to guide agricultural technology providers with how best to approach collection, use and sharing of agricultural data from farmers,” and notes that for the purpose of these principles:
- “Providers” refers to “those companies that intend to collect, use, or share ag data from farmers.”
- “Farmers” refers to “those persons and organizations engaged in growing crops, raising livestock, and producing food, fiber, or fuel products,” and include “growers, ranchers, and producers.”
- “Members” refer to “organizations and companies that support the ADT and align with its mission.”
“Although not mandatory, members of the ADT should strive to incorporate these core principles into their contracts with farmers,” the ADT says.
For a detailed look at the updated Core Principles, please visit the ADT website. Here’s a snapshot of what they include:
- Farmer Education: “Farmer education is a valuable component for ag data transparency. …”
- Simple Contracts: “Providers should strive to draft contracts using simple, easy to understand language. …”
- Ownership and Control: “The ADT’s core principles are based upon the fundamental belief that farmers should own information originating from their farming operations. …”
- Collection: “Providers should define the specific categories of data they may collect from farmers, including: agronomic data, land data, farm financial and management data, machine data, weather data, and livestock data. …”
- Notice of Changes: “Providers should notify farmers when the data agreements change and provide a summary of the changes. …”
- Transparency: “Providers shall inform farmers about the purposes for which they collect and use ag data. …”
- Choice: “Providers should explain the effects and abilities of a farmer’s decision to opt in, opt out or disable the availability of services and features offered by the provider. …”
- Portability: “Farmers should be able to retrieve their ag data for their own use or use in other platforms, with the exception of the data that has been made anonymous or aggregated and is no longer specifically identifiable. …”
- Identity of the Provider: “Farmers should know with whom they are contracting. …”
- Identity of Data Partners: “Providers should clearly define the third-parties that may have access to ag data …”
- Disclosure and Sale Limitation: “A provider should not share or disclose original ag data with a third party in any manner that is inconsistent with the contract with the farmer. …”
- Data Retention and Deletion: “Each provider should explain what rights the user has to request deletion of ag data. …”
- Termination: “Farmers should be allowed to terminate a service or halt the collection of ag data at any time. …”
- Anti-Competitive Activities: “Providers should not use ag data for unlawful or anti-competitive activities, such as using ag data to speculate in commodity markets.”
- Anonymization and Aggregation: “Providers should explain whether a farmer’s ag data is included in anonymized and aggregated datasets. …”
- Security: “Ag data should be protected with reasonable security safeguards against risks such as loss or unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification or disclosure. …”
Farmer sentiment about ag data
In a recent survey described on the ADT site, farmers expressed their views about ag data ownership and use. Conducted earlier this year as a joint effort between NASA Acres and the Farm Journal’s Trust in Food Initiative — with input from ADT — it asked more than 1,000 farmers about various aspects of ag data collection and use.
Survey results revealed several key themes, which “point to the need for transparency, simplicity, and trust” in the use of ag data:
- Farmers Own Their Own Data: “Farmers overwhelmingly believe they own their ag data. However, they are less confident in their understanding of other aspects of their ag data, especially regarding who has access to it and how it is currently stored.”
- Farmers Welcome Help in Data Use: “Farmers would welcome help in using their ag data better, but only a third of them know who to ask.”
- Data Privacy is a Concern: “Farmers have concerns around data privacy (including being unable to retain control over their data once it is shared) and their data potentially being misused or even used against them.”
“This survey is significant as it is the most current piece of research into the mindset of the American farmer when it comes to ag data use,” says Todd Janzen, ADT Administrator. “ADT is grateful to have been included in this project and looks forward to using the findings to help our members and the industry continue building trust to advance agriculture.”
