Walking down the aisles of a grocery store, you are met with an illusion of choice. While it may appear as if you can take your pick from the walls of different brands and options, this is far from reality. Today’s food and agriculture industry operates as an oligopoly in which a select few corporations control the entire market, limiting competition and consolidating power. In other words, just a handful of companies control how our food is produced, what we eat, and how much we pay for it. The consequences of their dominance are extensive and severe.
Just four corporations control 62.3 percent of the global agrochemical market and two own 40 percent of the global seed market. The three largest meatpacking firms control 63 percent of pork packing, 46 percent of beef packing, and 38 percent of poultry. Nestlé, Pepsico, Coca-Cola, Unilever, and Mars dominate global food and beverage production. Walmart stands as the largest food retailer in the United States, controlling over 25 percent of grocery sales. These are just a few of the statistics that show how these large corporations dominate all ends of the food industry. Moreover, these corporations have only been gaining power in recent years, squeezing out competition and leaving consumers and farmers with dwindling choices.
These corporations have amassed power and overwhelming market shares through political lobbying, allowing them to remain heavily unregulated and giving them a large say in agricultural policy (including subsidy programs). For instance, the agribusiness sector spent over $130 million in lobbying expenses in 2024. With the sheer will of financial power, these corporations work to ensure that laws passed by Congress are written in their favor. However, this often comes at the expense of small-scale farmers and consumers. Corporations also maintain their influence through the ‘revolving door’ phenomenon, where private sector industry executives and lobbyists take on government regulatory positions and vice versa, creating massive conflicts of interest. This pipeline connecting corporate executives directly to policymakers leads to regulations that prioritize corporate profit over public interest. To make matters worse, corporations also invest a lot of money in academic research—in 2015, federal agencies contributed less than half of basic science funding due to static budgets and increased investments from corporations and philanthropies. They fund studies that will shape public viewpoints and public policy, effectively controlling the narrative on food production.
Since only a few corporations dominate this industry, they have the ability to control prices, leaving smaller farmers with little say and consumers footing higher grocery bills. Corporations can effectively raise their prices whenever they want, with few repercussions, while consumers are simply forced to pay more—after all, food is a necessity. From 2020 to 2024, the overall Consumer Price Index (CPI) for food increased by 23.6 percent, a greater rise than that of the all-items CPI and higher than all categories except transportation. The power of these corporations also enables them to create unsafe working conditions that do not necessarily comply with legal standards. Workers in these industries face extremely hazardous and exploitative conditions and are severely underpaid. At the same time, consumers face declining food quality as corporations prioritize cost-cutting over nutrition and safety. Because these companies have invested so heavily in political lobbying, any regulations that could be passed to improve working conditions, food quality, sustainability, or the frequent price raises are improbable, if not outright impossible.
Corporate dominance over the industry has left medium- and small-scale farmers struggling to survive. With only a few corporations remaining to purchase their crops and livestock, these farmers have little say over the prices at which they can sell their goods, leaving them in a chokehold. Corporations dictate the prices they are willing to pay, even if they are shockingly low and unsustainable for the farmer. Many farmers sell their crops and livestock through contracts, agreements that dictate price, delivery dates, and sometimes even farming methods. For example, poultry farmers under contract with Tyson Foods must adhere to strict guidelines, leaving them minimal freedom in their operations. As industrial farms expand rapidly and small farms disappear, corporate dominance pushes independent farmers to the brink of extinction.
Many medium- and small-scale farms have disappeared off the map, leaving us with a few large industrial farms. This trend is jeopardizing the variety of crops and livestock systems, as industrial farms are known for their practice of monoculture, where they primarily cultivate vast amounts of a single crop or animal. This can lead to our dependence on mass-produced, standardized crops and foods that prioritize yield over taste or nutrition. Research shows that small farms, which often cultivate a diverse range of fruits, vegetables, and grains, produce a significant share of the world’s essential nutrients—71 percent of global vitamin A and over half of other key vitamins and minerals. In contrast, industrial farms prioritize monocultures and high-yield crops, which can lead to a decline in overall nutrient density. This pattern extends beyond produce—pasture-raised meat and dairy, more common on small farms, have been found to contain healthier fatty acid profiles and higher vitamin levels than their factory-farmed counterparts. The disappearance of medium- and small-scale farms also has devastating effects on rural communities around the world, which depend on farms as a significant component of their economies.
It is clear that this oligopoly has reached a breaking point. It affects the lives of everyone in the US and many internationally. Political lobbying allows these corporations to keep driving up prices, reduce food quality, and destroy the livelihoods of small-scale farmers. One potential alternative to this system is the ‘food sovereignty’ movement, which champions the right to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods. An example of this practice is community farms and gardens, where communities grow their own food to feed their populations without relying fully on grocery stores. However, due to the substantial financial bases of these corporations and tremendous legislation shifts that would need to happen, it seems unrealistic for food sovereignty to gain enough momentum in the United States to eventually be integrated into national policy.
One potentially more feasible alternative is to impose stricter regulations on corporate lobbying, such as complete transparency in campaign contributions or cooling-off periods for former government officials before they can lobby. While this essentially asks Congress to regulate itself, which could be challenging, public pressure and independent oversight bodies, among other initiatives, could assist in holding them accountable. Lastly, fairer contract terms for farmers could help level the playing field and stop the dwindling number of small-scale farmers. This definitely seems to be the most viable option, and through policy mandates, it could safeguard the rights and voices of small-scale farmers.
Food is a necessity for survival, but the industry treats it as a commodity designed solely to maximize profit. As this oligopoly persists, we, as consumers, are left with fewer choices, higher prices, and declining food quality. The corporate chokehold on our food system is not just an economic issue but a monumental crisis that demands our immediate attention.