Bayer’s legal exposure tied to its glyphosate based herbicide Roundup continues to mount. The company has paid more than 10 billion dollars to resolve a large share of lawsuits alleging links between Roundup exposure and cancers, like non Hodgkin lymphoma. Thousands of additional claims remain active in U.S. courts, signaling that litigation costs tied to the product are far from settled.

Adding a new twist to the scientific context of these disputes, a scientific paper published in 2000 and long cited as evidence that glyphosate posed no health risks was formally retracted by the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology in late 2025. The study, titled Safety Evaluation and Risk Assessment of the Herbicide Roundup and Its Active Ingredient, Glyphosate, for Humans, concluded glyphosate “does not pose a health risk to humans.”

The retraction notice cited concerns about independence and integrity of authorship, including internal documents indicating that Monsanto employees may have contributed to drafting the paper without appropriate disclosure. It also found that the study’s conclusions were based primarily on unpublished industry data supplied by Monsanto, raising ethical questions about transparency and conflicts of interest. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology’s editor stated that these issues undermined confidence in the paper’s findings and warranted removal from the scientific record.

While many regulatory agencies conduct risk assessments based on a broad body of evidence, the retraction removes one influential review from the literature. For organic and non GMO producers, the continued litigation highlights why input scrutiny, documentation, and risk avoidance remain central to market credibility. The Roundup cases continue to influence how farmers, processors, and brands evaluate liability and long term trust in agricultural inputs.

Sources: Lawsuit Information Center; Sokolove Law; Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology; The Guardian; The New York Times.

As organic and non GMO markets mature, some processors and buyers are quietly narrowing the range of crop varieties they accept. The shift is driven less by yield considerations and more by the need to manage processing consistency, quality specifications, and operational risk.

Processors report that variability in protein content, oil composition, moisture levels, and kernel size can complicate handling and downstream manufacturing. Accepting a narrower set of varieties allows facilities to reduce changeovers, standardize quality testing, and improve throughput efficiency. While certification status remains essential, it no longer guarantees that all compliant varieties are equally marketable.

For growers, this trend means that seed selection increasingly affects market access well before planting. Varieties that perform well agronomically may face limited outlets if they fall outside buyer specifications. In some regions, buyers are signaling preferred variety lists during contract negotiations or requesting advance disclosure of seed genetics.

Extension specialists note that this shift reflects broader risk management strategies rather than reduced demand. As organic processors scale operations, consistency becomes a priority comparable to volume. Narrower variety acceptance can also simplify traceability and documentation requirements within identity preserved supply chains.

Farmers planning organic plantings for the 2026 season are encouraged to discuss variety expectations with buyers early. Understanding which traits matter most to processors can help reduce marketing uncertainty and align production decisions with realistic market pathways.

Sources: USDA Agricultural Marketing Service Grain Quality Standards; Extension Crop Variety Trial and Processing Quality Publications; Organic Grain Buyer Contract Guidance and Market Reports

Organic agriculture is at a crossroads. As consumer demand grows and small farms seek viable market pathways, the complexity of USDA organic certification has become a flashpoint. Farmers, certifiers, and industry advocates increasingly argue that a system built decades ago for a smaller sector must modernize to meet today’s realities.

Reforms to USDA organic certification are gaining momentum following recommendations from the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission. Its second report, released in September 2025, called for streamlining certification to reduce costs and administrative burdens for small farms transitioning to organic, according to reporting by Farm Progress.

The MAHA Commission identified modernization as key to expanding organic acreage. Recommendations include flexible, risk-based inspections, simplified recordkeeping scaled to farm size, and clearer supplier-approval processes. The report urges USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service and the National Organic Program to work with third-party certifiers to keep the process “sound and sensible” while preserving organic integrity. AMS has confirmed it is developing a Common Organic System Plan to harmonize certifier requirements and clarify expectations.

These proposals build on earlier USDA initiatives, including the Sound and Sensible Initiative, which provides tools and training to simplify inspections and recordkeeping. The NOP also operates the Organic Integrity Learning Center, offering templates and educational resources. At the same time, the Strengthening Organic Enforcement rule has increased inspection and traceability requirements, adding complexity for smaller farms. Certifiers have noted inspector shortages and administrative strain in recent National Organic Standards Board meetings.

Simplifying certification while maintaining integrity could broaden participation, expand supply, and strengthen the organic sector’s growth trajectory, helping farms better connect with markets and consumers.

Sources: Farm Progress, USDA Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA National Organic Program.

Organic agriculture is entering a defining moment. After a record-breaking year in 2024, the sector is increasingly setting the pace for the agrifood economy. This influence is reflected not only in market performance but also in industry recognition, including the 2025 Agribusiness of the Year award, which underscores organic’s emergence as a credible leader shaping the future of modern agribusiness.

Ashbourne Farms in La Grange, Kentucky, was named Agribusiness of the Year for 2025, according to local reporting by The Oldham Era. The farm’s integrated approach illustrates why it has earned growing recognition within Kentucky’s agricultural sector. Over the years, Ashbourne has evolved from a traditional family estate into a diversified enterprise centered on regenerative, organic, and pasture-based production. Its operations now include certified-organic crops, rotationally grazed livestock, habitat restoration, and community education initiatives, positioning it as a regional model for environmentally grounded agriculture.

The award highlights the extent to which an organic agribusiness can outpace GMO-focused competitors, reflecting shifting market expectations and performance standards across the industry. With regenerative agriculture rapidly gaining prominence, the recognition also raises a question for the future: will 2026’s Agribusiness of the Year follow Ashbourne’s lead and exemplify regenerative practices?

Sources: Organic Trade Association (2024 U.S. organic sales performance); Organic Grower (category-level 2024 organic sales reporting); The Oldham Era (reporting on Ashbourne Farms named Agribusiness of the Year 2025); Ashbourne Farms official website (farm history and operational focus).

The 1980s farm crisis left deep marks across rural America. Tens of thousands of farmers lost their land, rural towns emptied, and a generation of young people left the countryside. For those committed to transparency, soil health, and independent food systems, the crisis remains both a warning and a guide.

One major lesson is the danger of depending on too few crops or markets. In the 1980s, high interest rates, shrinking export demand, and falling commodity prices exposed how fragile a system built on debt and monocultures could be. The Organic and Non-GMO movement carries that lesson forward by promoting diversified rotations, specialty markets, and farming approaches that are not tied to a single global price.

The crisis also showed that farmers need fair markets, not only high yields. Record harvests did not save farms when prices fell below the cost of production. This principle continues to guide our reporting as we ask whether organic premiums, non-GMO contracts, regenerative markets, or direct sales can support farm viability.

Another enduring lesson is the value of local and regional infrastructure. During the crisis, consolidation reduced farmer choice and bargaining power. Today, rebuilding regional mills, seed companies, cooperatives, and markets helps keep value in rural communities.

The farm crisis was painful, but its lessons continue to shape a more resilient and independent agricultural future.

Scroll to Top