The growing fear of animal activists may soon pale compared to another threat to commercial agriculture: the rise of the romantic agrarian consumer, fueled by an escalating disconnect between ag and consumers.

What is a romantic agrarian, you may ask? The phrase emerged several decades ago as a backlash to mechanization — the tractor — considered the disruptive technology driving change in agriculture.

“Romantic,” in this case, refers to a nostalgic yearning for the past — a pastoral return to something safe. Today those feelings are driven by information technology that has enabled farms to increase scale in ways we could not have imagined 50 years ago.

Anti-tech has been with us a long time. In the 1400s, Dutch workers, ticked off over automation, would throw their sabots (wooden shoes) into the wooden gears of the textile looms to break the cogs. That’s where we get the word sabotage.

Today’s romantic agrarian consumer, distrustful of technology (at least where food is concerned), longs to engage in a type of food production that feels less threatening and somehow safer. In today’s world that means organic, vegetarian, local-food enthusiasts, who have less and less appreciation for modern farming.

While romantic agrarian consumers passionately support their cause, they are nonetheless often confused. Local food enthusiasts believe food grown locally is more nutritious and more sustainable. Organic lovers contend their food is safer than conventional — also a dubious claim. There seems to be a yearning desire to lump organic in with local food, even though they are clearly two separate approaches to production.

Cultural disruption Even so, “the reappearance of romantic agrarians has  created social and cultural disruption, especially as more of our population is further removed from agriculture,” says Neil  Conklin, president of the Farm Foundation, a public charity focused on policy research.

Many people in the Obama administration are sympathetic to the issues raised by the romantic agrarians. Agencies beyond USDA, like EPA, Health and Human Services, even the Department of Energy, now have individuals in positions of power with little understanding or even support for commercial agriculture.

Ag issues are now on the White House radar. First lady Michelle Obama is a vocal cheerleader for local food and has gained world attention for her organic garden. 

While the administration proposes and Congress disposes, the executive branch has a great deal of control of regulatory mechanisms and how federal agencies operate their programs. The current heavy-handed approach to agriculture by EPA is just one example.

“We now have two competing visions for ag,” says Conklin. “One vision says the future is large, commercial farms driven by science and technology connected to consumers through global supply chains. The second vision is of small, sustainable, alternative organic farms connected to consumers through local food networks.

“Those are very different visions,” he adds. “On one side there is denial there’s any problem at all. On the other side is finger-pointing; people saying all our current problems are a result of the current system.”

Common vision With such a potent cocktail working against them, mainstream farm organizations cannot afford to ignore the romantic agrarian movement. “We don’t have a common vision any more,” Conklin says. “Increasingly the political question being posed is: Which vision will prevail? What we have to do is get a positive, affirmative dialogue going between the two sides. If we don’t do that, we’re going to be in dire straights in terms of where we go with new ag policy.”

So what should the relationship between consumers and farmers look like? That question seems murkier than ever. The social contract with ag in the 20th century was about sector sovereignty; that is, ag would be left alone.

The new emerging agenda won’t just focus on production and trade. It will include energy and climate change, food safety, obesity, animal production, human health, animal welfare, water quality, and local food systems (which USDA is already pushing with its “Know your farmer, know your food” initiative).

What do you think? Reply below.