AI in agriculture: precision farming, the Machinery Regulation and data
Adopted 2026-06-22 · ≈ 2 min read · 
edited by Dirk Baaijen
AI in agriculture — from precision farming to autonomous tractors — rarely falls under the AI Act's high-risk category, but it does fall under the Machinery Regulation for safe autonomous machines and under rules on who owns the farm data.
Short answer: AI in agriculture — decision support for fertilisation, image-based disease detection, autonomous tractors and harvesting robots — rarely falls under the AI Act's high-risk category. The centre of gravity lies elsewhere: the Machinery Regulation governs the safety of autonomous and AI-controlled machines, and data rules determine who owns and may use the valuable farm data.
Precision farming and the AI Act
Precision farming uses sensors, satellite imagery and models to manage each field or plant. These applications improve yield and reduce the use of water, fertiliser and pesticides.
In the AI Act risk pyramid these systems usually fall in the low- or minimal-risk category. They steer crops, not people, and do not touch fundamental rights such as recruitment or lending. High-risk obligations generally do not apply here — see the high-risk obligations overview for the cases where they do, such as AI in personnel decisions.
The Machinery Regulation for autonomous machines
The centre of gravity for agricultural AI is the Machinery Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2023/1230), applicable from January 2027. It treats self-driving tractors, harvesting robots and drones as machines with specific safety requirements.
What is new is that the regulation explicitly accounts for autonomous behaviour and for software that determines the machine's behaviour or changes it after sale. A manufacturer must show that the self-learning or self-steering part is safe too. For farmers this means: autonomous machines must have passed a conformity assessment.
Who owns the farm data?
The most underrated question is data ownership. Modern machines and platforms collect detailed data on fields, yields and working methods. That data is commercially valuable — for the farmer and for suppliers.
Personal data falls under the GDPR, but much agricultural data is business data, not personal data. There, contract law applies: what do the platform's terms say about who may use, share or resell the data? This is often where farmers unintentionally give away control.
What to do
- Classify your application: determine whether the system is low-risk or does touch fundamental rights (e.g. personnel AI).
- Ask about machine conformity: autonomous machines must be assessed under the Machinery Regulation.
- Read the data clauses: know who owns, may share or resells the farm data.
- Secure field safety: autonomous machines operate in unpredictable conditions — test and maintain actively.
- Separate personal from business data: GDPR for the former, contract for the latter.
The gains of AI in agriculture lie in precision and autonomy; the risk lies in machine safety and data control. Compare this with AI in hospitality and tourism, where personal data takes centre stage.
Sources
- https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1230/oj
Regulation (EU) 2023/1230 (Machinery Regulation): safety requirements for machines with autonomous behaviour and AI control. - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act): risk-based framework; agricultural AI mostly falls outside the high-risk category.
Read next
How the ECB supervises AI in eurozone banks: technology-neutral, existing frameworks, a generative-AI focus
For the 2026-2028 cycle the ECB places AI under its operational-resilience priority, and in February 2026 two Supervisory Board members set out the stance: with 85%+ of supervised banks using AI, govern it within existing frameworks rather than new rules, with a sharper focus on generative AI.
Right to explanation of an AI decision: what Article 86 of the AI Act gives you
If you are affected by a decision based (in part) on a high-risk AI system, Article 86 of the AI Act gives you the right to a clear explanation of the AI system's role and the main elements of the decision — from the deployer, on top of your GDPR rights.
National supervisors: how AI Act enforcement is divided (the Dutch case)
The AI Act is largely enforced nationally. In the Netherlands a draft Implementation Act (consultation 20 April–1 June 2026) gives the AP and RDI a coordinating role over ten existing market surveillance authorities, with the AFM and DNB supervising the financial sector.