Uhh... I worked in an adjacent industry for a while and multiple interactions with big players and small players left me the distinct impression that it was the other way around. Little players just kept doing what they did the year before because it "worked," no matter how sub-optimal, no matter how long-term detrimental, while big players hired agricultural scientists that actually knew how to measure, optimize, and spend money on costly upkeep with an expected long-term payoff.

>>currently corporate agriculture is less sustainable as they make little to no efforts in maintaining or building the top soil depth

How did you come to this conclusion? I'm close the industry, and in my experience, corporate farms spend a great deal of effort maintaining soil, which includes using drones to visually inspect crops to see where soil may be lacking certain nutrients based on foliage color analysis.

> Eventually having decent farm land is going to cost a premium and food price will rise because of it.

I believe prime tillable land in Iowa currently goes for something like $10k/acre. That's not really in the realm of "cheap" when you need 100s of acres to be profitable in today's farm economy.

Further, the agricultural colleges in the Midwest have extension offices specifically devoted to spreading best practices regarding sustainability and soil health.

Healthy soil is productive soil. There's a reason yields keep going up, and its not just down to plant breeding.

Industrial agriculture would still be cheaper than bespoke farming even if they were good stewards of their soil, if only because of economies of scale.

Perhaps the older generation is actually less sustainable. I recall a friend telling me how frustrating it was to be back farming with his dad because his dad insisted on tilling up the field every spring instead of using no-till methods.