While AGCO seemingly has good intentions when it comes to promoting conservation practices, it also looks like they have little interest in promoting numerous soil-saving concepts in North America. 

Could it be because the major-line OEM is more interested in selling intensive tillage tools and big horsepower tractors to what is perceived as “big-walleted” U.S. farmers?

Here’s My Gripe

The AGCO Agriculture Foundation recently announced a new partnership with Brazil’s Instituto de Conservação Ambiental.

Through a $300,000 grant over the next 2 years, they are helping Brazilian farmers adopt regenerative agriculture practices in the country that is a major competitor to the export of our own home-grown soybeans, corn and wheat.

“As the Foundation continues its commitment to support programs and initiatives that contribute to sustainably feeding the world, we see a great opportunity to strengthen farmers’ knowledge and ability to implement sustainable agriculture practices,” indicates Roger Batkin, board chair of the foundation. “We will work with farmers and their communities to improve soil health, increase yields, conserve nature and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

With the support of the foundation, the group will focus on adoption of regen ag and sustainable ag programs. The initial Brazilian project will support over 30 farms across 33,000 acres with the goal of expanding to 5,000 farmers in Brazil over the next 5 years.

Selling Our Technology to Other Countries

AGCO could spend their dollars on promoting regen ag here in the states. After all, Brazil already has the second largest no-till acreage of any country with over 106 million acres as of 2022, while the U.S. acreage has stalled. That growth in South America took place because growers NEEDED no-till to survive the 1970s, so they took the “knowledge investment route.” That is, investments were made in bringing University of Kentucky staffers in who gladly shared what they knew about the fledgling practice.

At that same time, many U.S. farmers stood pat as they had more margin to maneuver with conventional farming practices. And they also did so because, well, equipment manufacturers wouldn’t make commercially available no-till equipment — for fear of losing their “heavy iron” cash cows — until it was clear that they’d be left behind.

And still, the practice where no-till was born — right here in the U.S. — still has so far yet to go. So why not invest in knowledge right here at home? 

Kind of like the U.S. not wanting to share its technology with China.

While the U.S. represents a big market for AGCO, it seems more interested in investing conservation grant dollars in South America. And there are lots of deserving educational and knowledge transfer programs here domestically that significantly help American farmers make the sometimes-difficult transition to conservation management systems.

Tough Times ... Yet Dollars Flow to Brazil

A long-term U.S. farm machinery dealer can’t believe AGCO is doling out dollars as tough as he’s told its business is these days and slashing prices just to get ag equipment moved.

He even goes so far as to draw the similarities between the AGCO give-away and President Biden’s gift of billions of dollars to Angola. As he put it, “all the while Eastern Tennessee and North Carolina folks are freezing.” Not to mention the Southern Seaboard farmers who now face tremendous financial and soil losses from the recent hurricanes.

Might this money be better spent helping our growers recover from their own personal disasters? Or maybe better yet, to provide the knowledge and support systems to make conservation work, while mitigating some of the risk? 

Still More Wasted Dollars?

This dealer also asks why John Deere spends millions of dollars in omnipresent “goodwill” ads that simply promote the brand. While he can understand why RAM trucks sponsors a “So God Made a Farmer” commercial on Super Bowl Sunday, the Green Giant is wasting money left and right, he says. 

Plus, it also seems like other major ag equipment manufacturers are wasting millions on TV commercials aimed at pushing their company name God know who? Like sponsoring the pitching mound (yes, that 18-foot diameter circle) in Major League baseball games, scoreboard advertising, race cars, college basketball courts and recording artists.

Apparently it’s more important to attract Wall Streeters than cost-effectively putting farmers into advanced technologies. Stop the question-mark sponsorships and the social issues waste — including the Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG) checkboxes — and a lot of things in ag would be done a lot more cost effectively.

Anyway, it looks to me like U.S. farmers are getting the short end of the stick.

Related Content:

• How About Spending Where a Return is Always Found?