In nations where food is plentiful, it is easy to take that abundance for granted. In the United States, for example — a country rich in corn fields and pasturelands, and where shops overflow with cheap produce — agricultural research has languished for years under comparatively low budgets and disorganized funding priorities. In the 2009 economic stimulus bill, for example, the National Science Foundation received a $3-billion boost and the National Institutes of Health got $10 billion — but the Department of Agriculture's internal research programme was allocated just $176 million, all of which was restricted to improving facilities.

It is heartening, then, that the administration of President Barack Obama has begun a much-needed overhaul of the nation's agricultural-research programme. The groundwork was laid in June 2008, when US Congress mandated the creation of a National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) within the agriculture department. Under the leadership of Roger Beachy, whom Obama appointed in September last year, the new agency has taken over, expanded and revitalized the department's long-standing competitive grants programme, now called the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative.

Last week, NIFA released its eagerly anticipated first call for grant proposals, and the changes are indeed dramatic. In striking contrast to the smaller, two-year individual grants that were the mainstay of the programme, NIFA's offerings now include a series of five-year 'coordinated agricultural projects' of up to $45 million for collaborative, interdisciplinary research. NIFA has defined its funding priorities much more clearly than its predecessor did, and it has aligned them with a series of 'societal challenges' that include climate change, bioenergy and childhood obesity. The agency has also declared that the success of the programmes will be measured not just by scientific publications, but by real progress towards solving these challenges, such as reducing the amount of energy, nitrogen fertilizer and water used in agriculture by 10% by 2030. It has also introduced new fellowship and outreach programmes in an effort to stimulate the dwindling pipeline of young talent entering the field.

The overall intent, says Beachy, is to raise the status of the nation's agricultural research, hopefully drawing attention and support from the nation's lawmakers in the process. With just $262 million available for the first round of grants, the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative is still financially constrained compared with other US science agencies. But the structure of its competitive grants programme is an important step towards maximizing the impact of the funds that it does have.

The transition has not pleased everyone. News of Beachy's appointment caused a stir among opponents of genetically modified crops, who noted that he has voiced support for such crops in the past. Beachy has maintained that NIFA will also support small farms and traditional crop-breeding programmes, and the first call for proposals does seem to be doing this. But the strength of that support will become clear only after the grants have been made.

Meanwhile, many long-time agricultural researchers are feeling unsettled by the abruptness of the changes. Some are dismayed to find that their favourite funding programmes have been cut. Others find the new structure too prescriptive, and worry that it leaves little room for creative approaches. These are legitimate concerns, and NIFA should follow through with its promise to solicit input from the community before it crafts next year's proposals.

Nevertheless, the community should seize this opportunity to tackle big problems. Growing pains are inevitable, but the shake-up has the potential to rejuvenate the field at a time when its talents are desperately needed.