Robert Leonard and Matt Russell

Iowa View contributors

A voluntary solution to a number of global crises is right in front of us if we have the courage to embrace it.

Global warming and the rapid loss of species. Poor water quality. Soil health. Loss of habitat. Flooding in parts of the world, and desertification in others. Wildfires. Threats to our food supply, and overdependence on a few crops and animals. Rural poverty. Dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico and elsewhere, and environmental degradation causing social instability, ethnic tensions, population displacement, and war.

To solve these problems we need to rethink generations of public policy that rewards agricultural production at the expense of conservation. It shouldn’t. We can do both. Our food and fiber supply is a national security issue, as are the crises facing the world related in one way or another to catastrophic climate change. Don’t believe us that these risks are real? Ask the Pentagon.

The quickest and most cost-effective way to take on global warming and other challenges is to pay farmers and ranchers for environmental services. And by pay, we don’t mean traditional government cost-share programs; we mean cut them a check when they provide measurable environmental services.

We pay teachers, cops, and road crew workers for public services. We should pay farmers too. Right now, farmers who do invest in conservation practices are at a disadvantage to those who don’t. Conservation practices are a drain on the farmer’s bank account in a time where many of them are losing money due to low commodity prices and Trump’s tariffs. That has to stop. Once incentivized, American farmers large and small in every state will lead the way in protecting ecosystems as they produce our food and fiber, and once the benefits are realized, the rest of the world will follow.

Farmer-led environmental services can address these global problems. All relate to the capture of carbon that will work to slow global warming. Farmers can use five categories of practices to capture carbon and generate collateral environmental and social benefits: conservation tillage, keeping roots in the ground all year such as using cover crops, using livestock for environmental services like managed grazing, adding crops into rotations, and producing energy.

Smaller farms could be compensated at a higher level. Larger farms are important because of scale, but smaller farms are more capable of innovation.

Paying farmers to help solve global warming creates numerous collateral benefits: improved water quality, increased biological diversity, fewer pesticides and herbicides, and rural economic development as carbon farming requires higher levels of management and labor.

Sound too costly? It’s not. It’s pennies per meal that will reap immeasurable benefits. Not implementing this policy is much more costly and dangerous.

Numerous Democratic presidential candidates have already embraced parts or all of this proposal, with more announcements expected soon.

Critics of this proposal will argue government isn’t the answer and markets are better at solving problems. We disagree. While markets will play an important role, markets didn’t win World War II, put a man on the moon, or invent the Internet. Smart public policy investments, human innovation and courage did.

Innovative farm policy, American farmers and believing in rural America are what’s needed now. If Democratic caucus candidates and elected leaders across the partisan divide embrace this revolution, we’ll have a chance at leaving our children and grandchildren a future more abundant than the world we inherited from our ancestors.

Robert Leonard works for KNIA/KRLS Radio in Knoxville/Pella/Indianola.

Matt Russell is the executive director of Iowa Interfaith Power & Light.