IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - September 2020 - 90

Privacy and Security Principles for Farm Data
Policy and regulations must be carefully drafted to
improve effectiveness and minimize harm of using new
technologies in an organization [40]. In an attempt to
ensure ag data is not misused, the American Farm
Bureau Federation created their own voluntary code of
conduct called the "Privacy and Security Principles for
Farm Data" on November 13, 2014 [26], [41]. It outlined
big data best practices for ATPs. It covers a variety of
topics including education, notice, and transparency.
The complete list of topics is displayed below in Table 1
[19]. As of April 1, 2016 (the last time the web page was
updated), 39 companies and farmer associations have
signed on to the agreement [24], [42], [43]. ATPs have
been self-regulating since 2014 through the Privacy and
Security Principles for Farm Data.
This agreement on big data best practices was the
first step towards protecting farm data in the age of Big
Data. Out of the Privacy and Security Principles for Farm
Data, the Ag Data Transparent Project was created. The
Ag Data Transparent Project is a third party organization
comprised of various agricultural stakeholders including
farmer associations and ATPs. The project began with a
10-question survey all ATPs must answer with a "yes" or
"no" and an explanation. After the ATPs submit their
answers and their contracts and policies, a third-party
administrator, the law firm of Janzen Agricultual Law
LLC, reviews the materials. If approved, the ATP earns
the Ag Data Transparent seal and their results are published on the website [41], [44]. The 10 questions
included in the survey are shown in Table 2. As of
December 16, 2019, 20 companies have received the
seal; in 6 years, only 6 companies who had initially

TABLE 1. Privacy and Security Principles for
Farm Data.
Education
Ownership
Collection, Access, and Control
Notice
Transparency and Consistency
Choice
Portability
Terms and Definitions
Disclosure, Use, and Sale Limitation
Data Retention and Availability
Contract Termination
Unlawful or Anti-Competitive Activities
Liability and Security Safeguards

signed the agreement in 2014 have completed the process to secure the seal; 33 of the 39 original companies
who signed the original agreement in 2014 have gone
one to obtain the seal that signals they have followed
through on the core principles [43].
The Ag Data Transparent Project has succeeded in
providing an easy-to-read format for any user of the certification website. It is easy to skim through an ATP's
answers to the 10-questions with their "yes" or "no"
responses. For more information, each ATP can provide a
detailed explanation and a link to the contract, thus following through on the transparency part of the Privacy
and Security Principles for Farm Data [42]. Even though
the seal is a great first step to ensuring transparency in ag
big data, there are still several challenges. One, the principles that the seal represents focus on the outcome of
ag data practices and not on the process that generates
the data or analysis [41]. This can threaten the other factors that go into the big data infrastructure in agriculture
as described in previous sections. Once farmers are
aware of the seal, its meaning must be properly communicated; earning the seal does not necessarily mean that
the ATP has a contract in which the farmers' best interests are represented. For example, John Deere has
earned an Ag Data Transparent seal based on its
answers, but for the question "Do the ATP's agreements
address what happens to my data if the ATP is sold to
another company?", their answer was No [45]. This provides a potential privacy and security issue for the farmer.
If farmers believe that the seal represents complete data
protection, regardless if the company holding their data is
sold, they may be disappointed to discover that their priorities for data privacy may not be included. Lastly, it is
the responsibility of the ATP to report when there is a
change in their contract and to restart the certification
process [46]. As the seal grows in recognition and more
companies receive the seal, it will be easy for a contract
update to go unnoticed and violate the certification. As
the entire system hinges on the good-will of the participants, there is a lot of trust involved that the certified
organizations will keep their file updated, even in the
event of a change that is not beneficial for the farmers.
The Ag Data Transparent Project is dependent on the
financial support of the certified companies and the
required fee can range in cost from $2000-$6000. This
can be cost-prohibitive for smaller farmer groups that
are gaining ground in the community [46]. Open-source
and crowd-sourced big data organizations and citizen
scientist groups are beginning to shape the landscape
of big data in agriculture, but they are being shut out of
this important step to demonstrate that they are also
transparent and trustworthy. The financial hurdles to
becoming a funder of the project makes it possible for
larger ATPs to wield more power over the project.

IEEE TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIETY MAGAZINE

∕

SEPTEMBER 2020

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - September 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - September 2020