Examining & Refuting USDA’s Justifications for Decreasing Dedicated Organic Funding
This blog was co-written by OFRF’s Senior Policy and Programs Manager, Gordon Merrick, in collaboration with our partners at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC), and is available on their website as well. We are grateful to work alongside our coalition partners to amplify and strengthen the organic movement.
As the world becomes increasingly attuned to the sustainability and health implications of our food systems, the role of organic agriculture has never been more crucial. Organic management has been shown to not only build resilience in ecological systems, but also in economic ones. However, recent developments in the Presidential Budget Request for fiscal year 2025 (PBR25) reveal a concerning decrease in funding specifically allocated for organic-dedicated competitive grant programs. This shift requires a closer look and a strong response from the scientific community, policymakers, and funding agencies alike. In this blog, we aim to look at the justifications given for these policy changes, and discuss the impacts that will follow if these changes are made.
A Closer Look at the Funding Shift
The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) proposes to reduce funding for the Organic Transitions Research Program, opting to include more organic research through broader programs like the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) and the Specialty Crops Research Initiative (SCRI). The rationale provided for this shift hinges on two main points. First, that NIFA is transitioning away from its integrated (§406) authority* to focus on congressionally authorized programs. Put simply, NIFA’s integrated authority is a method for NIFA to answer research and extension questions related to issues not sufficiently covered by existing programming. Second, and relatedly, that several initiatives already support organic research at a substantial level. Despite these justifications, there is substantial evidence to suggest that AFRI and SCRI have historically not allocated adequate resources specifically to organic agriculture research, even with Congressional direction to do so.
The Gap in Organic Research Funding
While it is true that the Organic Research and Extension Initiative (OREI) exists to support organic agriculture, the decrease in dedicated funding for organic research in the PBR25 undermines the growth of organic farming practices, which are vital to addressing environmental challenges and health concerns. A review of the research projects awarded through SCRI and AFRI from 2009-2023 shows that the allocation for organic research does not meet the ongoing need. Within AFRI, funding levels have been historically substantial but have been falling short recently, while organic continues to grow its market share and presence. Through SCRI, funding has been sporadic and ultimately makes a small dent in the total funding for organic research topics. This underinvestment can lead to limits on the ability of these sectors to thrive or innovate at the pace required to address pressing agricultural challenges.
