Corporations Own 75% of Illinois Farmland - Farmers Don't
The Silent Revolution Destroying Family Agriculture in America's Heartland
Corporate investors now control most Illinois farmland, limiting farmers' ability to implement sustainable practices and threatening agricultural independence.
What You'll Learn in This Article
How corporate farmland ownership has reached 75% in America's most productive agricultural state
Which corporations and investors control the most farmland (the names will shock you)
Why absentee ownership prevents sustainable and regenerative farming practices
The real impact on food security and agricultural innovation
What this means for the future of independent farming in America
A silent revolution is reshaping American agriculture, and most people have no idea it's happening. In Illinois - America's agricultural heartland - fewer than 25% of farmers actually own the land they work. The rest is controlled by corporations, investment funds, religious organizations, and wealthy individuals who've never set foot on a farm.
This isn't just about ownership statistics. It's about who controls America's food system and whether farmers will have the freedom to grow food sustainably.
The implications extend far beyond simple property rights, affecting everything from farming practices and sustainability initiatives to rural community dynamics and food security strategies. As corporate money floods into farmland markets, the traditional family farm model is disappearing - and taking agricultural innovation with it.
The Scale of Corporate Control: Illinois as Ground Zero
Illinois represents the extreme end of a national trend toward absentee farmland ownership. With approximately 60% of all farmland owned by someone other than the person farming it, Illinois significantly exceeds the national average of 40% and surpasses neighboring states like Iowa (50%) and Indiana (52%).
According to Illinois Farm Business Farm Management (FBFM) data, farmers enrolled in their program owned only 23% of the land they farmed in 2021. The remaining 77% was divided between crop-share arrangements (30%) and cash rent leases (47%).
In America's most productive agricultural state, farmers are essentially becoming tenant workers on land controlled by distant investors.
The Money Behind the Land Grab
Illinois farms generated $26.4 billion in agricultural products in 2022, representing a massive increase from $17 billion in 2017. This economic success has attracted institutional investors who recognize farmland as a stable, profitable asset class.
Michael Lauher, incoming president of the Illinois Society of Professional Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, observes: "The financial and investment market has finally recognized what a good investment farmland is."
This recognition has fundamentally altered ownership structures and farming practices across the state.
The Corporate Players: Who Really Owns America's Farmland
The identity of Illinois's largest landowners reveals the depth of corporate penetration into American agriculture:
Religious Investment: The Mormon Land Empire
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints emerges as the single largest absentee farmland owner in Illinois, controlling 53,977 acres primarily concentrated in central Illinois. Through its investment arm, Farmland Reserve Inc., the church views farmland as a stable, long-term investment to fund humanitarian efforts.
This holding represents nearly 30% more acreage than the next largest organization, demonstrating how institutional religious investment has become a major force in agriculture.
Tech Billionaires in the Fields
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates holds 17,103 acres in Illinois, ranking sixth among absentee landowners. While Gates is the largest private farmland owner nationally with approximately 270,000 acres across 19 states, his Illinois holdings represent part of a broader strategy focused on "sustainable agriculture" and "climate change mitigation."
When billionaires decide what constitutes "sustainable" farming, their urban perspectives often conflict with farmers' practical knowledge and local conditions.
Corporate REITs: Treating Farmland Like Stock Portfolios
Farmland Partners, a real estate investment trust (REIT), ranks as the second-largest absentee landowner with 38,299 acres. Founded by Paul Pittman (ironically, a University of Illinois agriculture graduate), the company represents the financialization of farmland ownership.
As recently as February 2023, Farmland Partners continued expanding its Illinois holdings, purchasing 291 acres in Schuyler County for $2.16 million.
Ceres Partners, based in South Bend, Indiana, manages more than 160,000 acres across 12 states, including over 14,000 acres in Illinois. Founded in 2007, the firm positions itself as an "asset investment manager" focused on providing "income and capital appreciation with low volatility."
They treat farmland like a financial instrument, not as the foundation of food production.
Academic Institutions: Universities as Landlords
The University of Illinois and its foundation collectively own nearly 20,000 acres, utilizing this land for education, research, and revenue generation. While this might seem more benign than corporate ownership, it still removes land from farmer control and subjects agricultural decisions to institutional priorities.
How Absentee Ownership Kills Sustainable Agriculture
The separation of ownership from operation creates fundamental barriers to regenerative and sustainable farming practices. Real farmers trying to implement ecological methods face constant obstacles from distant landlords who prioritize short-term profits over long-term soil health.
The Hans Bishop Case Study
Hans Bishop's experience perfectly illustrates these constraints. Despite successfully operating a vegetable farm that sold to Whole Foods and local markets, Bishop was forced to abandon diversified production when land ownership changed hands.
The new absentee landlords required, "Clean corn and soybeans" with "perfectly straight grids of crops," prohibiting the vegetable production and organic practices Bishop had developed.
The mandate form on high destroyed a productive, sustainable farming operation to satisfy absentee owners' aesthetic preferences and risk aversion.
Cash Rent Leases: The Death of Long-Term Thinking
The shift from crop-share arrangements (30% of Illinois farmland) to cash rent leases (47%) fundamentally alters farming incentives:
Under crop-share leases: Landlords and tenants share both risks and rewards, creating mutual interest in sustainable practices that maintain long-term productivity.
Under cash rent leases: Tenants bear 100% of production risks while landlords receive fixed payments regardless of yield outcomes. This structure incentivizes:
Short-term yield maximization through intensive chemical inputs
Continuous row cropping rather than soil-building rotations
Avoidance of practices requiring multi-year implementation
Many conservation practices require upfront costs with benefits appearing over 3-5 years, but annual lease renewals create uncertainty about farmers' ability to capture these benefits.
Regional Variations Reveal Corporate Pressure
Northern Illinois farmers cash rent 64% of their land compared to 46% in central Illinois and 42% in southern Illinois. This pattern reflects stronger investor demand and higher land values in northern counties, creating intense pressure to maximize immediate productivity.
High farmland values ($12,000/acre in prime regions) intensify competition for leases, leading tenants to avoid practices that might marginally reduce yields for fear of lease termination.
The Technology Trap: Innovation Serving Corporate Interests
While absentee ownership can hinder sustainable practices, it may accelerate certain technology adoption - but not necessarily in ways that benefit farmers or food security.
Precision Agriculture for Corporate Control
Platforms like Taranis enable tenants to share real-time satellite imagery and yield data with distant landlords, creating transparency that serves corporate monitoring rather than farmer autonomy.
The Scully family's 35,800 acres utilize soil moisture sensors and automated irrigation, reducing water use by 15%. However, these technologies often serve to optimize conventional practices rather than transition to sustainable systems.
Precision agriculture generates valuable insights on soil health and crop performance, but lease agreements rarely clarify whether this data belongs to tenants or landlords. This ambiguity discourages farmers from investing in advanced analytics.
Corporate Clustering: Efficiency vs. Diversity
Farmland Partners emphasizes acquiring properties near existing holdings to create operational efficiencies and drive strong rental rates. This clustering strategy can facilitate shared equipment use and coordinated management practices across multiple properties.
However, while this creates operational efficiencies, it reinforces the dominance of corn and soybeans, which occupy 89% of Illinois cropland, rather than supporting agricultural diversification.
Climate Change and Agricultural Control
As climate change increasingly impacts traditional agricultural regions, Illinois's relatively stable climate and productive soils position the state as an agricultural refuge. Corporate control of this land raises critical questions about climate adaptation and food security.
Illinois as America's Climate Haven
The Tribune investigation suggests that Illinois is "emerging as the land of opportunity" due to its "nutrient-rich soil and more temperate weather." This climate advantage attracts additional investment but also concentrates corporate control over America's most climate-resilient agricultural land.
As California faces water challenges, the Southeast confronts hurricane risks, and the Great Plains experience drought susceptibility, Illinois's stable conditions become increasingly valuable for national food security.
Policy Responses: Too Little, Too Late?
Illinois has begun implementing climate-smart agriculture initiatives, receiving $111 million through a U.S. EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grant, with $73 million directed toward climate-smart agricultural practices.
However, the success of these programs may depend partly on overcoming ownership structure barriers. Effective program design MUST account for complex relationships between absentee landowners and farm operators.
Governor JB Pritzker's administration has expanded conservation programs, but uptake remains limited by absentee landowners' unfamiliarity with conservation programs and reliance on farm managers who prioritize short-term yields.
The Food Sovereignty Crisis
Corporate farmland control represents a direct threat to food sovereignty - the right of communities to control their own food systems.
Generational Transfer Crisis
The average age of Illinois producers increased from 58 to 58.6 years between 2017 and 2022, with only 10,632 producers under age 35 comprising 8.8% of all producers.
Young farmers face challenges accessing land ownership in an environment where established families and institutional investors compete for available properties. High land values require substantial capital or family resources to establish viable operations.
Economic Extraction vs. Community Investment
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates's 17,103 Illinois acres generate revenue that supports global philanthropic efforts rather than localized infrastructure. This pattern of economic extraction - where rental income flows to urban investors rather than being reinvested in rural communities - undermines the economic foundation of agricultural regions.
When land ownership profits leave rural communities, they don't support local businesses, schools, or infrastructure that historically sustained agricultural regions.
Fighting Back: Pathways to Agricultural Freedom
Despite the corporate takeover, opportunities exist to restore farmer control and agricultural independence:
Legal and Policy Solutions
Graduated rent structures that reduce payments during conservation transition periods
Tax incentives for landlords who approve sustainable practices
Lease templates incorporating conservation clauses
Education campaigns targeting urban-based owners
Alternative Ownership Models
Land trusts that prioritize agricultural use over investment returns
Beginning farmer programs that facilitate access to land ownership
Community-supported agriculture (CSA) models that connect consumers directly with farmers
Fractional ownership models enabled by technology platforms
Regenerative Agriculture as Resistance
The regenerative agriculture movement offers a path to agricultural independence by:
Reducing input costs through biological processes
Improving soil health to increase long-term productivity
Creating premium markets for sustainably produced food
Building direct relationships between farmers and consumers
Regenerative practices can make farmers less dependent on landlord approval by improving farm profitability and sustainability simultaneously.
FAQs
Q: How did corporations gain control of so much farmland without people noticing? A: The process happened gradually over decades through estate planning, investment strategies, and the financialization of agriculture. Many farmers sold or leased to generate retirement income, not realizing the cumulative impact on agricultural independence.
Q: Does corporate ownership necessarily mean worse farming practices? A: Not always, but it creates structural incentives that prioritize short-term profits over long-term sustainability. The separation of ownership from operation often prevents the implementation of regenerative practices that require multi-year investments.
Q: Can family farmers compete with corporate investors for land purchases? A: Rarely. Corporate investors can outbid farmers because they're seeking investment returns rather than operational income. A farmer needs the land to generate enough profit to live on, while investors only need competitive returns relative to other asset classes.
Q: What happens to food security when corporations control farmland? A: Corporate control can threaten food security by prioritizing profitable crops over diverse food production, reducing agricultural innovation, and making food systems more vulnerable to financial market pressures rather than community needs.
Q: Are there successful examples of communities maintaining farmer control of land? A: Yes - some communities have used land trusts, cooperative ownership models, and local investment funds to keep farmland in farmer hands. These models require community organization but can be highly effective.
About the Author: Ryan Griggs is the founder of The Regenaissance, a movement dedicated to rebuilding food sovereignty through regenerative agriculture, ancestral wisdom, and radical truth-telling.