He attributed the problem largely to "misconceptions about cyber threats and adversarial capabilities among agricultural stakeholders," and said the proposed consortium "will help bridge this gap and improve the cybersecurity posture of the critical agricultural sector, which also has national security implications."

What would the consortium actually do?

The recommendation rests on three pillars.

Multidisciplinary research and development. Key priorities could include:

• Using AI and other emerging technologies to detect, prevent and respond to cyberattacks;
• Creating simpler, more efficient ways to verify users and devices;
• Finding security flaws and building safeguards into equipment and software;
• Developing realistic farm testing environments to assess risks and understand attackers' capabilities;
• Exploring shared digital records that make unauthorized changes easier to detect;
• Sharing cybersecurity best practices and identifying investments that reduce risk.

Research infrastructures and testbeds. The ACC would bring university researchers, industry experts and other partners together to test cybersecurity solutions using real-world agricultural equipment and environments. Land-grant universities, USDA Agricultural Research Service facilities, regional irrigation districts and industry groups could develop and operate these sites with government support and possibly industry partnerships. Beyond research, the facilities would support hands-on training, public demonstrations, and evidence-based policies and standards.

Education and workforce development. Extension educators — university staff who bring research directly to farmers — could deliver practical, farm-focused instruction on protecting equipment and networks. Hands-on exercises would let participants practice responding to cyberattacks while keeping operations running. The consortium would share training materials and threat information across regions, though the researchers note these efforts would require federal-level funding support.

How would it be organized?

Workshop participants agreed the ACC should connect five regional centers through a national coordinating hub. Each center would work with local partners to conduct research, develop testing facilities and provide education and workforce training tailored to regional needs.

This structure follows models already used successfully by the National Plant Diagnostic Network and USDA Climate Hubs.

Why does it matter for Washington State?

Agriculture is a multibillion-dollar industry in Washington, producing more than 300 crops. Lav Khot, a professor in WSU's Department of Biological Systems Engineering who directs AgWeatherNet and co-authored the article, said growers there face persistent labor shortages and rising input costs, pushing them toward smart, cybersecure agricultural technologies to improve efficiency, productivity and resilience.

"This consortium provides a critical framework for aligning stakeholders and accelerating the development, education and adoption of secure and resilient agricultural technologies," Khot said.

What happens next?

Creating and sustaining the ACC would require significant federal and state funding plus a robust public-private partnership. Some might find the cost daunting, the researchers acknowledged — but, they argued, the cost of doing nothing will be even more substantial.

The proposal remains a recommendation at this stage. Whether federal and state governments commit the funding needed to build the five-center network will determine if it moves from paper to practice.