Northern Illinois farmer says 2025 crop yields strong despite disease pressure – Brownfield Ag News

Report on 2025 Agricultural Yields in Northern Illinois and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Crop Production and Contribution to SDG 2 (Zero Hunger)

An assessment of the 2025 growing season in Ogle County, Illinois, reveals strong agricultural output, a key factor in advancing Sustainable Development Goal 2, which aims to end hunger and ensure food security. Despite certain challenges, the harvest is reported to be robust.

• Crop yields are described as “very, very good,” with production levels expected to be comparable to the previous year’s successful harvest.
• Sufficient August rainfall was a contributing factor to the strong yields, reinforcing the link between climate conditions and food production capacity.
• This level of output directly supports the stability of the food supply chain, a foundational component of achieving Zero Hunger.

Challenges to Sustainable Production and Economic Viability (SDG 12 & SDG 8)

While overall production was high, several factors presented challenges to achieving optimal outcomes and ensuring the economic sustainability of farming operations, touching upon SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).

1. Disease Pressure: The presence of crop diseases reportedly diminished the “extreme top end” of potential yields. This highlights a critical challenge for SDG 12, as resilient and sustainable agricultural practices are necessary to mitigate production losses.
2. Market Conditions: Unfavorable market conditions have limited opportunities for farmers to sell their crops profitably. This directly impacts the economic viability of agricultural producers, a key concern for SDG 8.
3. Post-Harvest Management: In response to low prices, farmers are retaining their harvest, leading to high demand for on-farm storage. This emphasizes the importance of efficient post-harvest systems to reduce food loss and support producer livelihoods, aligning with targets under both SDG 12 and SDG 2.

Operational Status and Data Availability

The conclusion of the harvest season marks a transition to preparatory fieldwork for the subsequent cycle, though data reporting faces interruptions.

• The majority of farmers in the region have completed their harvest.
• Post-harvest activities, such as fall fertilizer applications and fieldwork, are underway, demonstrating proactive management for future production cycles.
• The dissemination of official agricultural data, including the USDA’s weekly crop progress reports, has been suspended due to a partial government shutdown. This creates an information gap for stakeholders monitoring progress toward sustainable food systems.
• A forthcoming supply and demand report is anticipated to provide critical market insights.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

   The article primarily addresses issues related to SDG 2: Zero Hunger, which focuses on ending hunger, achieving food security, improving nutrition, and promoting sustainable agriculture. Additionally, there are connections to SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth, given the discussion on the economic aspects of farming.

   • SDG 2: Zero Hunger: The core of the article discusses agricultural production, specifically corn and soybean yields in Illinois. It touches upon factors affecting food supply, such as crop yields (“strong despite disease pressure”), challenges to production (“Disease took the extreme top end off”), and post-harvest management (“storage space is at a premium”). These are all central themes of SDG 2.
   • SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The article mentions the financial viability of farming, which relates to economic productivity and the livelihoods of farmers. The farmer’s comments on marketing his crops (“There wasn’t a lot of opportunity to even hedge off at a profit”) and waiting for better market conditions (“farmers are waiting for something better”) connect directly to the economic performance of the agricultural sector.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

   Based on the article’s content, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

   • Target 2.3 (under SDG 2): By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers… The article directly discusses “crop yields,” which is a measure of agricultural productivity. The farmer’s statement that the crop “will probably rival last year’s” is a direct comment on productivity levels. The discussion about the lack of “opportunity to even hedge off at a profit” speaks to the income aspect of this target.
   • Target 2.4 (under SDG 2): By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production… The article highlights a challenge to resilient agriculture by mentioning that “Disease took the extreme top end off” the yields. It also refers to a key agricultural practice, “fall fertilizer applications,” which is part of managing food production systems.
   • Target 2.a (under SDG 2): Increase investment in, inter alia, rural infrastructure… The farmer’s observation that “storage space is at a premium” points directly to the state of rural infrastructure, specifically post-harvest storage facilities, which is a key area for investment under this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

   The article implies several indicators that can be used to measure progress, even if it does not provide quantitative data:

   • Implied Indicator for Target 2.3: The official indicator is 2.3.1 Volume of production per labour unit… The article’s focus on “corn yields” and “soybean yields” serves as a direct proxy for agricultural productivity (volume of production per unit of land). The farmer’s qualitative assessment (“strong,” “very, very good crop”) is an informal measure of this indicator.
   • Implied Indicator for Target 2.4: The official indicator is 2.4.1 Proportion of agricultural area under productive and sustainable agriculture. The article implies challenges to this by mentioning “disease pressure,” which affects the resilience and productivity of the agricultural system. The mention of “fall fertilizer applications” is a specific practice that would be assessed when measuring the sustainability of the agricultural area.
   • Implied Indicator for Target 2.a: While there isn’t a direct indicator mentioned, the statement “storage space is at a premium” serves as a qualitative indicator of the adequacy of post-harvest rural infrastructure. A lack of sufficient storage can lead to post-harvest losses and affects farmers’ ability to market their grain effectively, highlighting a potential gap in infrastructure investment.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

   SDGs	Targets	Indicators (Mentioned or Implied in the Article)
   SDG 2: Zero Hunger	Target 2.3: Double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers.	The article discusses “crop yields” as a measure of productivity and the lack of “opportunity to even hedge off at a profit” as an indicator of farmer income.
   SDG 2: Zero Hunger	Target 2.4: Ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices.	The mention of “disease pressure” indicates a challenge to agricultural resilience. “Fall fertilizer applications” is mentioned as a specific agricultural practice.
   SDG 2: Zero Hunger	Target 2.a: Increase investment in rural infrastructure.	The statement that “storage space is at a premium” serves as a qualitative indicator of the adequacy of post-harvest storage infrastructure.

Source: brownfieldagnews.com