How Clear, Timely Science Communication Supports Effective Agricultural Policy

How CAST helps credible research reach decision-makers when it matters most 

Artificial intelligence is spreading rapidly across agricultural research, production, and food systems. At the same time, the data centers supporting it are raising questions about energy demand, land use, local economies, environmental effects, and rural communities.

Policymakers need credible information about both the technology and its consequences while decisions are still being considered.

Policy that ignores facts and scientific reality is less likely to work as intended. Likewise, research that is not communicated clearly, credibly, and in time may never reach the people who need it.

That challenge is not new. The Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, commonly known as CAST, was created more than 50 years ago because agricultural leaders recognized the need to communicate science and technology to the policymaking community. What is changing is the speed and complexity of the questions—and the ways decision-makers consume information. 

That was the focus of the latest episode of Clearing the Air on Agricultural Policy, the Barry Flinchbaugh Center for Ag and Food Policy’s monthly conversation on agricultural policy.

Chris Boomsma, CEO of CAST, joined the panel to explain how the organization assembles, interprets, and communicates credible science-based information to legislators, regulators, industry leaders, the media, and the public.

CAST does not lobby or advocate for specific policy outcomes. Its role is to help decision-makers understand the available evidence, its limitations, and the broader consequences they may need to consider.

https://youtu.be/V-FugOmGMw0

CAST Is Examining AI Across the Agricultural System

Artificial intelligence is not being treated as a single technology project inside CAST.

The organization’s animal, plant, and food work groups are all examining how AI could affect their respective parts of agriculture. CAST has already released a paper on AI and agriculture and is developing a policy brief and additional educational programming.

Boomsma said the objective is to help decision-makers understand both the opportunities and the challenges surrounding the technology.

CAST begins with a broad assessment of an issue and then moves into more specific questions. In the case of AI, that means considering its implications for livestock production, crop agriculture, food systems, regulation, research, and the communities affected by technological change.

The work illustrates a basic challenge for science organizations. AI is changing quickly, but the information presented to policymakers must still meet standards for scientific rigor, expert review, and credibility.

CAST’s task is not to trade accuracy for speed. It is to produce credible information while the questions are still relevant to the people making decisions. 

Data Centers Make AI a Rural Policy Question

The technology itself is only one part of the AI discussion.

AI also depends on physical infrastructure, including data centers. Where those facilities are built and how they operate can affect energy demand, infrastructure, land use, local development, environmental conditions, and nearby communities.

Boomsma said broad issues with significant social implications cannot be evaluated through technical science alone.

“If we’re covering a broad topic that has social implications, you not only talk about the science and the technology,” he said.

The analysis may also require environmental, economic, and social perspectives.

Boomsma applied that principle directly to AI infrastructure.

“If you talk about data centers and you don’t think about the social component, you haven’t thought about it holistically and what it could mean for rural communities,” he said.

CAST has not reached a final conclusion about those effects. The point is that they must be represented in the analysis.

Policymakers need information about what AI can do. They may also need to understand which resources its infrastructure requires, where the costs and benefits fall, and what tradeoffs rural communities could face. 

Different Audiences Need Science Communicated in Different Ways

Scientific communication has always been central to CAST’s mission. The organization was formed in the early 1970s in part to explain the importance of agricultural science and technology to policymakers.

Research papers remain one important part of that work. But they are not the only way decision-makers receive or use information.

A congressional staff member may need detailed analysis of a specific question. A journalist may need a high-level explanation. A regulator or industry leader may want to hear directly from a scientist who can explain the evidence and respond to questions.

CAST uses papers, policy briefs, infographics, webinars, podcasts, videos, and direct meetings with experts to serve those different needs.

“We try to meet our various audiences where they are with the information they need at the level that they need it at,” Boomsma said.

Timing is equally important. Research may be credible and useful, but it cannot inform a decision that has already been made.

Boomsma said CAST’s goal is to provide the best available answer, at the appropriate level of certainty, while the issue is still active.

“Being timely with your scientific information and communicating in a way that’s valuable is pretty difficult,” he said.

Podcasts and webinars have become particularly useful for congressional staff because they fit the way those audiences consume information. They also allow decision-makers to hear directly from the experts who conducted or reviewed the work.

The expansion into new formats does not replace rigorous research. It helps make that research accessible to the people who need it, when they need it.

Credibility Requires Clarity About Uncertainty

A scientific publication written for policymakers cannot simply duplicate an article written for a technical journal.

The evidence must remain rigorous, but the findings also have to be understood by people weighing economic consequences, public values, political priorities, and competing risks.

CAST relies on networks of volunteer authors, contributors, and reviewers to develop its materials. Those products go through internal debate and review before they are released.

But scientific credentials alone do not determine who presents the findings to policymakers.

CAST deliberately seeks experts who can communicate outside their own disciplines. Sometimes only one or two members of a larger author group will take the findings to Washington and explain them to legislators and staff.

“You always need to have the right communicators for the job,” Boomsma said. “Not just people doing the science—people that can communicate the science.”

That includes being direct about uncertainty.

Scientific evidence does not always produce one permanent, risk-free answer. Effective communication requires explaining what the evidence supports, what remains uncertain, and which risks or tradeoffs decision-makers still need to evaluate.

“You have to go into this with some level of just realism and humility,” Boomsma said.

Acknowledging uncertainty does not have to weaken the credibility of the research. Boomsma argued that it can improve how the information is received and strengthen trust.

“We shouldn’t come at it and say we’ve got all the answers,” he said. “‘We’re experts. Trust us.’ Well, that’s just not how society works.”

Science cannot resolve every disagreement involving values, priorities, or acceptable levels of risk. It can, however, provide a stronger factual foundation for evaluating the available alternatives and their likely consequences.

CAST Is Considering a Broader National Model

The need for credible, multidisciplinary communication is also leading CAST to consider a broader future role.

Boomsma described the developing idea, loosely, as a “National Academy of Agriculture.” He emphasized that the name is not final and does not indicate a formal connection to the National Academies.

The underlying concept is a larger coalition of agricultural science and technology stakeholders. It could bring together universities, scientific societies, policy centers, nonprofit organizations, companies, public institutions, and experts from multiple disciplines.

CAST’s established mission is to educate and inform. A broader coalition could support greater coordination and help establish strategic direction for agricultural science and technology in the United States.

Boomsma said agriculture is undergoing significant structural change. Understanding that change will require more than biological, physical, and agricultural sciences. Economics, sociology, public policy, and other disciplines are also necessary to evaluate how new technologies and systems affect institutions, markets, and communities.

He also made clear that CAST is not seeking to control the agricultural science landscape.

“CAST is not looking to exclusively control this space or be the Uber organization overall,” he said.

The goal would instead be to convene, coordinate, and facilitate collaboration among organizations with different areas of expertise.

But the coalition’s value would ultimately depend on what it accomplishes.

“Not just conversing, not just chatting, not just convening, but driving towards action and impact,” Boomsma said.

The broader vision is still taking shape as CAST prepares for 2027. Questions remain about which organizations will participate, how the coalition will maintain scientific rigor and nonpartisanship, and how it could turn a wider range of expertise into useful direction and action. 

Clear Communication Connects Science With Decisions 

Policy decisions made without credible facts or an understanding of scientific reality are less likely to achieve their intended outcomes.

But producing credible research is only one side of that equation. Researchers and science organizations must also communicate their findings clearly, honestly, and while the information can still contribute to the decision.

CAST operates at that intersection. It does not make policy decisions or advocate for a preferred outcome. It works to ensure that legislators, regulators, industry leaders, and other audiences have access to credible science and the experts capable of explaining it.

With AI expanding across agriculture—and bringing new technical, economic, environmental, and social questions with it—that communication role is as important as ever.

Boomsma joined Clearing the Air on Agricultural Policy, hosted by Eric Atkinson of Kansas State University with regular panelists Jennifer Ifft, the Flinchbaugh Agricultural Policy Chair at Kansas State University; Mark Edelman, professor emeritus and longtime agricultural and rural policy specialist at Iowa State University; and Brad Lubben, agricultural and public policy specialist at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln.

Clearing the Air is produced as a monthly collaboration between the Flinchbaugh Center and Smoke and Mirrors: Ag Policy Unfiltered, Jennifer Ifft’s podcast on agricultural policy.

Watch the full conversation with Chris Boomsma.

---

About Clearing the Air 

Clearing the Air is a monthly podcast brought to you by The Flinchbaugh Center in partnership with the Smoke and Mirrors podcast. Hosted by Eric Atkinson, the show offers thoughtful, fact‑driven conversations for anyone interested in the intersection of agricultural economics, policy, and real‑world decision‑making. Each episode features insights from Jennifer Ifft, Mark Edelman, and Brad Lubben, along with a rotating monthly guest.