U.S. Taxpayers, Foreign Agricultural Development and the Bumpers Amendment:
Farm Journal Report Raises Important Questions
American farmers face rising input costs, tight margins, volatile export markets, and increasing competition from agricultural powerhouses worldwide. Against that backdrop, a new Farm Journal Foundation report proposes a strategy that deserves careful examination and a cautionary note: using U.S. agricultural development and foreign-assistance programs to help emerging economies become future customers for American agriculture.
Released in September 2026, Building the Next Generation of U.S. Agricultural Export Markets: The Role of Agricultural Development Investments Abroad in Strengthening U.S. Trade argues that emerging markets, particularly in Africa and South Asia, could provide significant future demand for U.S. agricultural products. Recent reporting on the study describes its proposal as leveraging federal economic-development and trade-assistance programs to increase future agricultural trade.
The strategy raises an important question:
When U.S. taxpayers finance agricultural development abroad, what safeguards ensure those investments ultimately strengthen, rather than compete with, American agriculture?
Using Agricultural Development to Build Future Customers
Farm Journal Foundation's long-term strategy uses U.S. foreign policy and agricultural-development programs to prepare emerging economies for commercial trade. It recommends investing in processing, storage, cold chains, customs and regulatory systems, commercial ties, agricultural research and technical assistance. It also supports standards for food safety, plant and animal health, and biotechnology that align with U.S. trade. The Foundation says agricultural development can boost purchasing power, build value chains and strengthen institutions before trade promotion and private investment expand. It notes that nine of the ten largest U.S. agricultural export destinations in 2024 had previously received U.S. assistance.
However, the report itself cautions that this relationship does not establish causation. Countries develop through their own policies, investment, infrastructure, and economic growth, in addition to outside assistance. More importantly, helping another country increase its agricultural capacity does not guarantee that country will become a major customer for U.S. agriculture.
Brazil: A Cautionary Example – We Funded the Development of a Competitor to American Agriculture
The Farm Journal Report specifically labels Brazil a "Cautionary Example." U.S. universities, researchers, and other institutions participated in decades of cooperation with Brazilian counterparts involving agricultural education, soybean breeding, soil fertility, agronomy, and tropical production systems. The outcome of those efforts illustrates a risk inherent in foreign agricultural capacity building.
Brazil did not become a major destination for U.S. bulk commodities. It became one of America's most formidable agricultural competitors.
The Farm Journal Report identifies Brazil as the world's largest soybean producer and exporter, China's leading foreign soybean supplier, and the principal U.S. competitor in global soybean trade. The report also notes that as U.S. agricultural exports to China declined sharply after 2022, Brazil strengthened its position in the Chinese market, particularly in soybeans.
That history raises a fundamental policy question:
Could today's taxpayer-supported agricultural-development project help create tomorrow's competitor to American farmers?
Congress Has Asked This Question Before – The Bumpers Amendment
Congress addressed this concern four decades ago through what became known as the Bumpers Amendment. Named for former Sen. Dale Bumpers of Arkansas, the provision originated in the 1986 Urgent Supplemental Appropriations Act. Congressional Research Service describes it as prohibiting U.S. foreign-assistance funds from supporting activities that encourage agricultural exports from developing countries when those exports could compete with U.S. agricultural products in international markets.
The restriction has included exceptions, notably for qualifying food-security activities and research primarily intended to benefit U.S. producers.
Protecting American Agriculture While Building Markets
International agricultural development can advance humanitarian, diplomatic, food-security and commercial goals while creating markets for U.S. livestock, grains, dairy, feed and technology. Unlike temporary aid, investments in research, genetics, expertise, institutions and infrastructure can generate economic benefits for decades.
What happened with Brazil demonstrates that those benefits do not necessarily accrue to American producers. As policymakers consider proposals to expand or better coordinate taxpayer-supported agricultural development overseas, the Bumpers Amendment reminds Congress of its longstanding responsibility to consider the interests of American farmers.
The central question should not simply be whether foreign agricultural development produces worthwhile outcomes abroad. Policymakers should also ask whether taxpayer-supported programs strengthen long-term markets for U.S. agriculture, whether adequate safeguards prevent the creation of subsidized competitors, and whether comparable investments should first go to agricultural research, infrastructure, processing capacity, and resilience here at home.
American taxpayers can help build agricultural capacity around the world. But before they are asked to finance it, American farmers deserve assurance that they are not being asked to finance their future competition.