Echoes of Appalachia

Foreign investors are steadily acquiring farmland across the Appalachian region, raising questions among locals, lawmakers, and watchdogs about who’s behind these purchases, what they plan to do with the land, and what it means for the future of the region’s rural communities. While the full picture is often hidden behind layers of LLCs and incomplete public records, a closer look reveals a mix of economic motives, global trends, and legal loopholes driving the surge.

The biggest foreign players buying U.S. farmland are not who most people expect. Despite growing political attention focused on China, Canadian investors own by far the most U.S. farmland between 12 and 14 million acres, which is about 30% of all foreign-owned farmland in the country. Dutch, Italian, British, and German investors follow closely, many of whom are tied to agricultural holding companies, timber firms, and renewable energy developers. Chinese entities, by contrast, hold less than 400,000 acres nationwide only a small fraction of total foreign holdings.

In Appalachia, the numbers are harder to pin down. The region spans over 400 counties across 13 states, from Alabama to New York. The USDA collects foreign land ownership data under the Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act (AFIDA), but their records do not publicly break down ownership at a regional level. In many cases, parcels are held by anonymous shell companies registered in states like Delaware or Utah, making it nearly impossible to know exactly who owns what and where. Based on available data and local patterns, experts believe that foreign investors likely own tens of thousands possibly hundreds of thousands of acres in Appalachian counties, but nowhere near a majority share.

So why is this happening? In many cases, it comes down to price and long-term value. Land in Appalachia is relatively cheap compared to other parts of the U.S., especially areas with booming development or prime agricultural soil. Investors see Appalachian tracts as undervalued assets with long-term upside. Some are betting on a future where clean water, timber, or carbon credits become more valuable. Others are leasing land to renewable energy companies building wind or solar farms, especially in flatter areas or ridge tops. In fact, most of the recent growth in foreign-owned land across the U.S. is linked to renewable energy leases not farming in the traditional sense.

Some foreign buyers are also “land banking” acquiring large tracts of rural land not to farm or develop now, but to hold and flip later. The Appalachian region, with its scenic beauty and relatively lax zoning laws, appeals to speculative buyers, some of whom are also purchasing land for recreational or survivalist purposes. In many rural counties, longtime residents report seeing out-of-state or foreign buyers scoop up old family farms or hunting properties sometimes through cash offers well above market value.

While foreign investors are not new to U.S. land markets, the lack of transparency is increasingly a concern. The AFIDA database often lacks key details, such as the country of origin or the specific location of the land. Some filings are years out of date. Local governments rarely have the resources to investigate land transfers, and often, residents only learn of a foreign connection after a project breaks ground or a dispute arises.

The question of how much land foreign investors own in Appalachia specifically is complicated by all of this. A few known cases have gained public attention like large renewable projects in Kentucky or timberland acquisitions in West Virginia, but the vast majority of foreign-held land remains hidden in databases or untraceable through LLC structures. What we do know is that Appalachian states like Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee, and North Carolina have all seen foreign ownership rise in recent years. In some areas, especially those with depressed land values, a single deal can represent thousands of acres changing hands at once.

This has not gone unnoticed. In response to growing concern, more than 20 states have proposed or passed legislation restricting foreign ownership of agricultural land, especially by entities tied to countries deemed adversarial, such as China, Russia, or Iran. Appalachian states like Tennessee and Kentucky are among them. Lawmakers argue that food security, national security, and economic sovereignty are at stake particularly when land is located near military bases or critical water sources.

At the same time, some caution that the issue is more complex than headlines suggest. The majority of foreign landowners in the U.S. are from allied nations, and many operate legitimate businesses tied to timber, agriculture, or green energy. Blanket bans could discourage international investment or trigger legal challenges. More targeted policies like improved transparency rules and limits on sensitive locations may be more effective.

For now, Appalachian communities face a landscape in flux. Longtime farmers, retirees, and working-class families are competing with deep-pocketed investors they often never meet. Rising land prices and absentee ownership can strain local economies and undercut traditions of stewardship and family inheritance. But not all foreign ownership is harmful. Some investors manage land sustainably or reinvest in local infrastructure. The real issue is not foreign ownership itself, but how it happens and who benefits.

Until federal and state authorities improve tracking, enforcement, and public access to land ownership data, it will remain difficult to separate fact from fear. What’s clear is that the farmland of Appalachia is no longer just a local asset it’s a global one, with all the risks and opportunities that come with that. As interest from abroad continues to grow, so too does the need for informed, balanced oversight to ensure the region’s land remains a source of livelihood, identity, and sustainability for generations to come.

-Tim Carmichael