It’s been a year of shakeup for international assistance after the abrupt closure of the U.S. Agency for International Development. Agri-Pulse Newsmakers asked former Ag Secretary and current World Food Prize Foundation CEO Tom Vilsack about how the approach to international aid can be reinvented, the feasibility of moving the Food for Peace program to USDA, and whether he’s concerned President Trump’s tariff policy could affect long-term market access for U.S. farmers.
Plus, 2025 World Food Prize Laureate and Embrapa Soybean researcher Mariangela Hungria joined the show to discuss her life’s work advancing soil microbiology, how Brazilian farmers have embraced biologicals, and how the “Micro Green Revolution” has changed the trajectory of agriculture in Brazil.
Lydia Johnson: Welcome to Agri-Pulse Newsmakers, where we aim to take you to the heart of ag policy. I’m your host, Lydia Johnson. Our guest this week are World Food Prize Foundation CEO Tom Vilsack and 2025 World Food Prize laureate doctor Mariangela Hungria who join us to discuss global food security and Brazil’s rise as a global ag leader through soil microbiology.
But first, here’s this week’s headlines.
• President Donald Trump said he will impose a new 100% tariff on imports from China starting November 1st. The announcement came after Beijing’s decision to tighten exports of critical minerals. Trump later said the administration could undertake targeted retaliation over China’s ongoing refusal to buy U.S. soybeans. That retaliation could include limiting imports of Chinese cooking oil, which has increased tenfold between 2022 and 2024, according to U.S. trade data. To ease the economic pain of farmers impacted by the loss of markets from the trade war, the Trump administration has moved $13 billion to USDA s Commodity Credit Corporation account to fund an aid package. However, the administration’s official aid package announcement is being delayed by the government shutdown.
• The State Department could restart Feed the Future labs as soon as this year. More than a dozen innovation labs and the Feed the Future initiative have been in limbo since the Trump administration froze foreign assistance earlier this year after dodging multiple rescission attempts. This summer. Funding for the program remains intact for the 2025 fiscal year. However, the money is yet to be allocated or authorized for use. A State Department spokesperson still called the program invaluable and said they hope to reestablish partnerships with U.S. universities as early as this year.
• A federal judge has temporarily barred the federal government from conducting reductions in force while the government is shut down. Federal employee unions sought a temporary restraining order to stop the refs, arguing that they violate the Anti deficiency Act, which prohibits the government from spending money it doesn’t have. Senior U.S. Judge Susan Alston said the evidence suggests that the Office of Management and Budget in the Office of Personnel Management have taken advantage of the lapse in government spending. Alston said the administration’s issuance of more than 4000 reduction in force notices during the shutdown is illegal and exceeds its authority. The judge ordered the administration to issue no further RIF notices and to take no action to enforce the notices it has already issued.
The World Food Prize Borlaug dialog will kick off next week. International assistance has been shaken up this year after the abrupt closure of the U.S. agency for International Development. We asked former secretary and current World Food Prize Foundation CEO Tom Vilsack how the U.S. aid closure has impacted global hunger.
Tom Vilsack: Though obviously it’s created a challenge because of the sudden nature of the decision that was made. Having said that, I think what’s interesting is the reaction that people are now using to essentially look at ways in which, the need can be, can be met, new opportunities, new structures, new partnerships, the leveraging of resources in the private sector and the philanthropic sector are now working collaboratively together. There was an interesting, op ed that was written by Raj Shah, who used to be the administrator, USAID, who is now in charge of the Rockefeller Foundation. And he suggested that, now we’re looking at a sort of a new way of thinking, about development, where the onus and the responsibility starts with the local, community starts with the country or, area of the, of the world that is currently dealing with food insecurity, the responsibility they have to feed their people and to work collaboratively with the private sector and the philanthropic world to raise the resources necessary to ensure that there’s adequate production. So a lot of opportunity, a lot of innovation. A lot of, I think a lot of promise, despite the challenges now in the short term, there’s just no question there going to be some folks who, who are going to suffer, and we’re going to try to do what we can at the World Food Prize Foundation, to alert people to the situation, to encourage the private sector and the philanthropic sector to act quickly and responsibly, to try to meet this need.
Lydia Johnson: I’m curious, there’s also a lot of uncertainty around the food for peace program that purchases U.S. commodities for international feeding programs. Some lawmakers want to move that program to USDA. With your experience, do you think it’s feasible for the ag department to take on and continue that program?
Tom Vilsack: Well, I think it’s going to be a challenge because you don’t necessarily have the institutional, knowledge of the, the relationships that were built up by USAID in the administration of the program. We basically receive the money and then work collaboratively with USAID, who were on the ground, if you will, who had the personal relationships with people in these countries that were being that were receiving aid and assistance. So you have to build those relationships. So it may be easier for, USDA to work collaboratively with other partners that are in-country now, that we’re working with USAID. But it’s going to take a little bit of time to figure out how and who, is actually going to get this job done.
Lydia Johnson: Former Secretary Tom Vilsack now serves as CEO of the World Food Prize Foundation. We asked him why he thinks President Trump’s tariff policy could affect long term market access for U.S. farmers.
Tom Vilsack: It’s a good question because I think there’s short term and long-term impacts, and on the short-term impact and obviously be dealt with, the farmers lose a significant market. And, certainly, China for soybeans was the market, for all intents and purposes, for many of our soybean producers. You can deal with that by providing some kind of relief to the farmer, which basically buys them time. But the challenge, I think, is that when a market like this one, gets closed, when decisions are made by that purchaser to purchase someplace else, when, the tariff situation gets resolved, you can’t assume that the market’s going to return to where it was pre-tariff, because relationships get built and get, get, constructed, where individual purchasers, and in China’s case, state owned businesses end up purchasing, from a Brazil develop relationships are satisfied with the quality and quantity. So, they just continue to do business because they’re in a pattern. One of the, I think one of the results of the previous, efforts by the Trump administration with tariffs was that Brazil basically benefited, and they used that opportunity to significantly improve their infrastructure and their transportation infrastructure. So, what once was, I think a market advantage we had in the U.S. for getting our soybeans to market less expensively because of our transportation system. That advantage is now gone. From a cost perspective. And so Brazil is now very, very competitive. So not only are they are they able to produce and produce adequate quality, but now they can make it at an affordable price. So that relationship with China and Brazil, that’s not going to that’s not going to change. That’s not they’re not going to go back to the United States immediately. So I think the challenge is figuring out what else can we do with these soybeans, what other products could potentially be produced domestically that create a larger domestic market? I’m thinking of renewable fuels. And what could be done, potentially in terms of opening up additional markets in other parts of the world where or in Southeast Asia, for example.
Lydia Johnson: And you mentioned the low cost of, production for Brazilian soybeans, but while you were in office as secretary, actually worked on competition issues. And Ag Secretary Brooke Rollins now is cracking down on input prices with the Department of Justice, saying trying to maintain competition in the input sector. I’m curious, how is her vision and the work that she is proposed going to do, different from where your work in the Biden administration and what’s needed to really correct input prices for producers in the long term?
Tom Vilsack: Well, in connection with the relationship with the Department of Justice, it’s essentially the same as what the Biden administration did. We had a same similar relationship with the Department of Justice. In fact, we had a we put a farmer, fairness website out that allowed farmers to communicate to both us and to the Department of Justice if they felt they weren’t being treated fairly in the marketplace, if they felt there was some circumstance in a situation that was anti-competitive, they gave us a heads up. So, we had that relationship with the Department of Justice. So it sounds like that’s going to continue. And that’s a good thing. It’s not necessarily a new thing, but it’s certainly a good thing for it to continue. We also, when additional we took additional steps, which was that we had a relationship with state attorney generals. And the reality is that there are a lot of opportunities at the state level where there are local issues that crop up for state attorney generals to be able to prosecute and to pursue, as our Department of Justice could at the federal level, anti-competitive behavior. And we provided that resource to those AGS, at the state level so that they could hire experts, they could do the economic analysis that is often involved, in any kind of antitrust or in a competitive circumstance. I believe that, the current secretary has basically made a decision to stop that, that relationship, which I, you know, I think, that they are a tool. So, I hope would be that as, upon further reflection, that they might see the opportunity to restore that relationship with the state agencies, as they have with the Department of Justice.
Lydia Johnson: We’ll be back with more newsmakers. But first, Andrew Huneke looks at global ag productivity in this week’s Ag by the Numbers.
Andrew Huneke: Agricultural productivity growth in both the US and across the world has decreased and now stands well below the rate required to sustainably meet evolving global demand, according to the latest Global Agricultural Productivity Report from Virginia Tech University. The report notes that the current productivity growth is only about 0.76 percentage points yearly, which is only about a third of what’s needed to reach that goal. This chart shows the latest global agricultural productivity Index. The blue lines represent the historical rate of total factor productivity and the projected productivity at the current rate of 0.76%. Just mentioned. The green lines represent what researchers believe the average yearly productivity rate required to meet the estimated demand in 2050 needs to be. The dotted line is a growth rate of 1.73%, and that would keep agriculture’s environmental and geographical footprint to 2010 levels because of the productivity growth slowdown already mentioned. Researchers are revising that estimate to 2%, indicated by the solid line for Agri Pulse, I’m Andrew Huneke.
Lydia Johnson: Welcome back, Doctor Hungria has dedicated much of her life worked using soil microbes to transform agriculture in Brazil and is being awarded the 2025 World Food Prize. This year. We asked her why she began studying soil microbiology at the beginning of her career, when few others were focused on it.
Mariangela Hungria: When I enter at the University, since the very first time I said, wow, I want to study the biological microorganisms to help to produce more food, but in the more healthy way. But this was very unusual because at that time it was just chemicals and chemicals and chemicals.
Lydia Johnson: I’m curious. Brazil farmers have adopted microbial inoculants in about 100 million acres, one of the highest rates of any country in the world. You know, your work throughout your career. How did you convince producers to trust and embrace this technology, and how have you seen them, you know, implement that on the ground in the fields?
Mariangela Hungria: Well, it’s very interesting because it’s not just something that you can build in 1 or 2 years. Like I said, I built this in 40 years. I had people who, before I came, like my supervisor, we had to create microbiology. Seemed to 1950s, 1960s here in Brazil. And they started, this idea of, well, we have a tropical agriculture. We have shortage of, fertilizers. We have to import them. So let’s try to have biological solutions. And so, I can say that in 40 years, every year I do field experiments, I do demonstration plots for the farmers and everything. So it’s a continuous activity. If you stop 2 or 3 years, I see that the percentage of, of the farmers that you see, may decrease. I believe that, Maybe not now because really, the last five years, it’s like here, the explosion of use of biologicals. But as you. But before, when we were building these ideas in farmers that biologicals can replace the chemicals partially or fully, that depending on the situation, we had to go every year. Okay. But then as soon as farmers start to see the benefits, they really adopt it very easily
Lydia Johnson: Brazil has become somewhat of a global powerhouse in the agriculture space during your career. How is the focus on soil microbiology changed agriculture in Brazil through your career and as you’ve, as you’ve continued to do work in the space.
Mariangela Hungria: One interesting thing in Brazil is because of our climate, we can have 2 or 3 crops, during one year, because we do not have winter. So we, we crop all over, the year. And of course, for this type of cropping, we need fertilizers, okay? There’s no way of doing agriculture in this large scale without fertilizers. But we import another the age of 85% of our fertilizers, and they are very expensive. They cost in dollars and everything. And then the biologicals were key, and are key for us to go on as the main grain producers in the world for you to have an idea ag here in Brazil, biological nitrogen fixation with the soybean crop. I work at the soybean center, so it’s the main crop that I work with. If we had to buy nitrogen fertilizers for the soybean crop, it would cost, $26 billion last year. Okay, so we, I came without a door. Thought guaranteed to you that we are today the main soybean producers and exporters. The award of soybean. Just because we have quite a large crop. Nitrogen fixation.
Lydia Johnson: The 2025 World Food Prize laureate doctor Hungaria has called her approach a micro green revolution. We asked her how this vision differs from the original Green Revolution, led by Doctor Norman Bourlag.
Mariangela Hungria: The vision that Norman Bourlag was, so important, so important. Look, my light went, bigger. And then university started, agronomy. It was in 1976, and then we were into top of this green revolution of breeding and adding lots of, chemicals to power, brick, soil fertility and so on. Look at this time, in Brazil, Brazil, just a few years ago, in the 1960s, Brazil had to import, food. We were not we could not even attend to our population. And by using Norman Bourlag green revolution, we started to be exporters of food. His vision allowed us to go to this new frontier in Brazil that we called the Brazilian sardines in the central part of Brazil, that everybody thought that that we could not, do agriculture, that because of problems of soil fertility. Today is our main producing area in Brazil, the main producing seed. And this was due to Norman Bourlag’s great vision. So it was extremely important. But, today we are in this new field. We agriculture is changing. We are thinking about sustainability. And we have this vision of many biologicals as much as biological. So we put the better we will improve soil health. We will produce healthy food and everything. But very interesting, also is that Norman Bourlag visit us here in Brazil and then, we had this book, in my, preview saying, but, where, we start lots of biologicals there. And he wrote that the biologicals were the next Green Revolution, and that it was really very important. He considered the most important work to work with biologicals. So, he, he agreed with that in his last visit to Brazil. And then it’s amazing he had a view of the future. He said that biologicals were the view of the future. That’s why we called micro green, because it’s like a tribute that we will never forget the contribution of Norman Bourlag. But now with microorganisms helping this view
Lydia Johnson: And as you look to the future, lots of breakthroughs already. But what breakthroughs or innovations excite you most as you look to the future? And where do you see this next big leap coming from?
Mariangela Hungria: Well, you know the thing is that the methodologies, the science, is so exciting, today that I just said, because I’m old and I don’t have many time, I, because, like, solutions that, took me 15 years to get the solution. Today, I see that in 2 or 3 years, you can get. So, methodologies for bio prospecting, microorganisms with, an interesting microbial process. Genome editing like Crispr. No. We’re manipulating plant microbiome to have solutions to all problems in agriculture. So I’m sure that, if we, if science has founding, has, if the governors, really believe in science and also the private sector, things can, they results can come very fast, and, we can progress a lot, much faster then, then the way that I had to do through the my years.
Lydia Johnson: We’ll be back with more Newsmakers. But first Andrew Huneke has more on soybean production in the US and Brazil in this week’s Ag by the Numbers.
Andrew Huneke: China still has not booked any future purchases of American soybeans, corn, wheat and sorghum. The American soybean industry relies on China for around half of its total exports, but China’s retaliatory tariffs on American soybeans has left the US product less competitive than other countries like Brazil. Brazil is the world’s largest soybean producer, and it’s been ahead of the United States for several years now. As you can see in this chart, Brazil started producing more soybeans than the U.S in the 2018 2019 crop year, according to USDA, Brazil is expected to produce around 170 million metric tons of soybeans this year, compared to about 120 million in the U.S. China has not responded with any new tariff announcements for Agri-Pulse, I’m Andrew Huneke.
Lydia Johnson: Thanks for joining us for another episode of Agri Pulse Newsmakers. As world leaders prepare for the COP30 climate conference in Brazil this November. American agriculture is a critical opportunity to shape the global conversation on sustainable food systems. Join us on October 21st at the National Press Club for conversations on how U.S. agricultural innovation is delivering solutions the world needs. Tune in to newsmakers next week and check our website any time for the latest developments on all things food, farm and fuel policy. For agri-pulse. I’m Lydia Johnson. Thanks for watching.
Agriculture