Autonomous ag tech to transform farming

The transformative power of new technologies is becoming an old refrain. AI, drones, robotics, and other computer-dependent systems are changing the way we do nearly everything. Farming is no exception.

It’s now possible to imagine a day not too far off when a farmer will be able to send an autonomous 60-horsepower tractor into the field to accomplish work that used to require a million-dollar, human-operated machine. The robot might not do the work as quickly, but it will be able to stay in the field around the clock until the work is done.

So far, so good. But for the property and casualty insurance industry, the advent of autonomous agriculture is ushering in a fresh set of challenges. As the farm of tomorrow comes nearer to being the farm of today, it’s creating a new landscape of risk, making it necessary for P&C companies — including Grinnell Mutual — to answer modern farm operations’ traditional and emerging needs.

“We need to be able to describe and respond to the challenges that are arising as autonomous ag becomes more and more prevalent,” said Grinnell Mutual President and CEO Dave Wingert. “And that means developing products that respond to a new set of risks.”

No longer niche

Industry reporting suggests farm automation is no longer a niche concept. According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), by 2023 roughly 27 percent of U.S. farms were using some form of autonomous or semi-autonomous systems, which it gathers under the tent of “precision agriculture.”

“We’re seeing a pretty quick advancement of [these technologies],” said Dave Heynen, president of Farmers Mutual Insurance of Hull, Iowa, and Grinnell Mutual board member. “As insurers, we’re going to be a little uneasy about them. But five or six years down the road, autonomous farming is just going to be the norm.”

That means insurers aren’t looking at an isolated experimental market. They’re looking at a market that’s already established and is rapidly evolving.

Simple economics

For farmers with larger acreages, equipping their operations with autonomous technology may make immediate financial sense. Precision agriculture requires a much lower initial investment than more traditional models that are dependent on human labor. Though “lower” is a relative term.

One 2026 article by HeavyDutyYard had prices ranging from $89,000 to over $830,000 for equipment with varying levels of autonomy, plus $3,000–6,000 yearly for software charges. The price tag for retrofitting an existing suite of ag equipment to make it autonomous or semi-autonomous can run from $40,000 to $200,000. Use of autonomous equipment can also enable a scaled-down maintenance schedule, allow for more efficient execution of a wide range of tasks, and lower the energy needed to accomplish them. Plus, autonomous machines can work long hours without falling afoul of OSHA regulations, helping producers manage labor costs and worker shortages.

These machines can perform their tasks with extreme exactitude — sending a drone out to apply herbicide to a single weed, for example, or applying a fungicide to an isolated infected patch rather than to an entire field. That means less money laid out for the chemical inputs that keep the farmer’s crops healthy and high in yield.

A new view of risk

If this makes the adoption of farm robotics sound like it ought to be a no-brainer, as with so much else about farming, it pays to take a close and cautious look. There are loss scenarios that even AI or a fleet of autonomous implements can’t help with.

Agriculture has always been a business of physical risk, and in the farm environment now emerging, farmers will still need insurance to provide the coverages that have protected them in the past against crop failures, adverse weather events, collisions, fires, and breakdowns.

With automation adding a digital layer in virtually every major operation, though, questions of liability become harder to settle. Traditional farm liability analysis generally assumes a human being is in control. Taking the human out of the loop might trigger a decline in some traditional exposures, but it also might introduce some potentially expensive new ones.

“In my view, autonomous technology is more likely to change the nature of risk than it is to eliminate it,” said Roby Shay, Grinnell Mutual’s chief operating officer. “When an autonomous system is involved in a loss, new considerations emerge.”

Instead of focusing only on acreage, structures, loss history, and operator experience, underwriters will also need to understand cybercrime, firmware updates, vendor contracts, maintenance logs, remote shutoff capabilities, connectivity dependencies, and data governance. If an autonomous tractor causes damage because it’s been hijacked by a bad actor, if a drone drifts off course, a robotic harvester damages property after its network goes down, or a software malfunction scrambles an autonomous tractor’s systems, liability for the adverse outcome can quickly spread beyond the farmer. The manufacturer, software provider, maintenance contractor, and potentially the network that supported the device also face risk.

Obviously, this presents a much more complicated liability picture. And with technology continuing to drive the headlong pace of change, the insurance industry will have to respond with products and services that protect farm operations against both existing and emergent vulnerabilities.

The more things change…

As an old French proverb would have it, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.”

And Grinnell Mutual’s first step for addressing new coverage needs for autonomous ag will be the same as it is for any new line of business — a careful review of the actuarial data analysis conducted by Verisk’s Insurance Services Office (ISO) and the American Association of Insurance Services (AAIS).

Both ISO and AAIS develop forms to aggregate information from multiple companies and are typically on the forefront in providing the sort of data insurers need to build appropriate coverage. Grinnell Mutual will also consult its own data gathered to answer questions like ‘What are we seeing? What challenges have we had with our claims, and what alternatives do we want to create to help address some of these issues in the future?”

What about now?

It’s worth emphasizing that though ag robotics is rapidly evolving, in terms of writing P&C coverage for farms employing it, it’s still early days and the demand isn’t yet urgent.

“We came out with drone coverage earlier this year for crop spraying,” said Todd Milburn, Grinnell Mutual’s assistant vice president for Commercial Lines Underwriting. “But we really haven't even been asked very much about autonomous machines at this point.”

That being said, Grinnell Mutual is keeping a weather eye on developments.

“We’re not quite there with coverage for self-driving farm implements,” said Stacy Walton, director of the company’s Farm Casualty Underwriting team. “We’re monitoring industry research and development for this type of new technology to determine how our underwriting appetite for self-driving farm implements may evolve. For now, a policyholder looking to cover an autonomous ag setup will need to work closely with their agent to review their farm liability or Commercial General Liability (CGL) policy to determine what coverage might apply and if it meets their specific insurance needs.”

In other words, however advanced the shiny new tech may be, making sure a farm operation is adequately insured is likely to depend on what it has always depended on: the policyholder-agent relationship.

The information included here was obtained from sources believed to be reliable, however Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Company, SI, and its employees make no guarantee of results and assume no liability in connection with any training, materials, suggestions, or information provided. It is the user’s responsibility to confirm compliance with any applicable local, state, or federal regulations. Information obtained from or via Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Company, SI, should not be used as the basis for legal advice and should be confirmed with alternative sources.

8/2026