The US protects two crop fertilizers. Farmers hope for lower costs – Wyoming Public Media

U.S. Designates Key Agricultural Minerals as Critical to Bolster Food Security and Sustainable Development

Strategic Importance for Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Zero Hunger)

The United States government has added phosphate and potash, two compounds essential for fertilizing crops, to its 2025 List of Critical Minerals. This designation directly supports the objectives of SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) by aiming to secure the inputs necessary for robust agricultural production. As vital components of “plant food,” these minerals are indispensable for maintaining soil fertility and ensuring high crop yields, which are foundational to a secure and stable food supply.

• Enhanced Soil Fertility: Securing the supply of phosphate and potash is critical for replenishing soil nutrients and supporting sustainable farming practices.
• Increased Crop Productivity: A stable supply of these fertilizers helps farmers maximize the output of essential crops like alfalfa, wheat, and corn.
• Strengthened National Food Security: By classifying these minerals as critical, the U.S. is taking steps to safeguard its domestic food production systems against global supply chain disruptions.

Economic and Supply Chain Implications for SDGs 8 and 9

The decision addresses significant economic volatility faced by American farmers due to fluctuating trade policies and high interest rates. By promoting a more stable domestic supply, this policy aligns with SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) by supporting the economic viability of the agricultural sector and protecting the livelihoods of farmers. Furthermore, the initiative supports SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) by fostering resilient domestic industries and infrastructure.

1. Stabilization of Fertilizer Prices: The designation is expected to mitigate extreme price swings for agricultural producers, creating a more predictable economic environment.
2. Streamlining Domestic Production: Adding the minerals to the list could streamline the permitting process for domestic mining operations in states like Florida, Utah, and Idaho.
3. Reducing Import Reliance: The U.S. currently imports a significant amount of potash from Canada, Russia, and Belarus, and phosphate from China. This move aims to lessen that dependency.
4. Protecting Global Supply Chains: The policy includes measures to provide greater protections for the global supply chain of these essential agricultural inputs.

Policy and Governance in Support of Global Goals

This action was the result of a bipartisan effort by U.S. lawmakers, demonstrating a commitment consistent with SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). Legislators, including Rep. Harriet Hageman of Wyoming, advocated for the inclusion of these minerals to ensure that “our soil fertile, our farmers productive, and our food supply secure.” This collaborative approach underscores the recognized importance of these resources for national well-being and sustainable agricultural policy. The federal government also updated the list to include other key materials.

• Phosphate
• Potash
• Copper
• Uranium
• Metallurgical coal

Alignment with SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production)

By prioritizing the domestic sourcing of phosphate and potash, the U.S. is moving toward more responsible and sustainable production patterns, a key target of SDG 12. Encouraging domestic extraction allows for greater regulatory oversight of environmental and labor standards compared to reliance on international sources. This strategic shift aims to create a more resilient and accountable supply chain for minerals that are fundamental to feeding the nation and contributing to global food stability.

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

The article discusses issues related to agriculture, food security, economic stability for farmers, and the management of natural resources, which connect to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The primary SDGs addressed are:

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
• SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

This goal is central to the article’s theme. The designation of phosphate and potash as critical minerals is directly linked to ensuring food security. The article quotes Rep. Harriet Hageman, who states these minerals are “indispensable agricultural inputs that keep our soil fertile, our farmers productive, and our food supply secure.” This highlights the goal of achieving food security and promoting sustainable agriculture.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

The economic well-being of farmers is a key issue. The article mentions that “changing trade policies coupled with high interest rates have meant big price swings for the average American farmer.” By designating these minerals as critical, the U.S. government aims to stabilize or lower prices, which would support the economic viability of farming, contributing to sustained and inclusive economic growth for the agricultural sector.

SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

The article touches on building resilient infrastructure and promoting sustainable industrialization. The decision to add these minerals to the critical list “could mean streamlining mining permits domestically, along with more protections for the global supply chain.” This points to efforts to strengthen domestic industrial capacity for producing essential agricultural inputs, reducing reliance on imports from countries like Canada, Russia, and China, and thereby building a more resilient supply chain.

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

This goal is relevant through its focus on the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources. Phosphate and potash are finite natural resources. By designating them as “critical,” the U.S. acknowledges their importance and the need to manage their supply chain responsibly to ensure their availability for sustainable food production.

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

Based on the article’s discussion, several specific SDG targets can be identified:

• Target 2.3: By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers…
  
  Explanation: The article highlights the financial pressure on farmers due to “big price swings” in fertilizer costs. The effort to “help lower prices” for these “critical ‘plant food'” directly aims to reduce input costs for farmers like Todd Fornstrom, which in turn can improve their income and productivity.
• Target 2.4: By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices…
  
  Explanation: Securing the supply of phosphate and potash is presented as a measure to keep the “food supply secure.” By protecting the supply chain and potentially increasing domestic production, the U.S. is working to build a more resilient agricultural system that is less vulnerable to global trade disruptions.
• Target 9.2: Promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization…
  
  Explanation: The article implies a move towards strengthening domestic industry by mentioning that the designation could lead to “streamlining mining permits domestically.” This supports the development of the domestic mining and processing industry for these essential minerals.
• Target 12.2: By 2030, achieve the sustainable management and efficient use of natural resources.
  
  Explanation: The entire premise of creating a “critical minerals list” is to ensure the strategic management of essential natural resources. The article’s focus on securing the supply of phosphate and potash reflects an effort to manage these resources sustainably for long-term food security.

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

The article does not mention official SDG indicators, but it implies several metrics that could be used to measure progress:

• Indicator for Target 2.3 (Implied): Price of agricultural inputs.
  
  Explanation: The article explicitly discusses the problem of “big price swings” for fertilizers and the hope that the new designation will “help lower prices.” Therefore, tracking the market price of potash and phosphate for farmers would be a direct indicator of progress. The farmer’s analogy of an electric bill going from “$80” to “$200” emphasizes the importance of this metric.
• Indicator for Target 2.4 (Implied): Domestic production vs. import dependency.
  
  Explanation: The article notes that potash is “largely imported from Canada, along with Russia and Belarus” and some phosphate comes from “China and other countries.” A key goal of the designation is to secure the supply chain, which implies reducing this dependency. An indicator would be the ratio of domestically produced phosphate and potash to the total amount consumed, measuring the resilience of the food production system.
• Indicator for Target 9.2 (Implied): Number of domestic mining permits issued.
  
  Explanation: The article states that the designation “could mean streamlining mining permits domestically.” An increase in the number of permits issued for phosphate and potash mining in states like Florida, North Dakota, Utah, and Idaho would be a clear indicator of progress towards boosting domestic industrial capacity.

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

Source: wyomingpublicmedia.org