The Canadian agriculture and food sector has many things going right.
It is a major economic contributor, with products that have a lower environmental footprint at a time when Canada’s role in global food security is increasingly clear. Those fundamentals drive a lot of optimism in the sector.
But — and it is a big but — no matter how good the fundamentals are, it is hard to get past significant headwinds facing the sector.
Read Also
Proactive approach best bet with looming catastrophes
The Pan-Canadian Action Plan on African swine fever has been developed to avoid the worst case scenario — a total loss ofmarket access.
That is why the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute undertook a national, cross value-chain survey to inform the Agri-Food Risk Report Phase 1. This initial survey provided a snapshot that highlighted a sense of optimism in the face of significant risk.
Arguably, things have gotten worse since the survey was done in May. China launched an anti-dumping investigation into Canadian canola. Trains ground to a halt on Canada’s two national railways. The weather complicated harvest on the Prairies.
It is easy to understand why extreme weather, trade and market access risks are top of mind for the sector. They are external threats that affect profitability and are harder to mitigate and manage.
However, the risk that topped the survey — policy risk — is as clear as mud.
While the survey did not define policy risk, the largest number of respondents identified it as the risk they worry about most. Better understanding this risk is part of CAPI’s work.
The differences between respondents from government and from other parts of the sector were often greater than the differences between any other demographic group.
For example, when asked what priorities governments should address, government respondents were more likely to prioritize climate change and less likely to select trade policy and advocacy than farmers and other industry respondents.
There are a variety of realities driving that difference: a growing rural-urban divide and its corresponding political consequences, plus declining confidence in politicians and the bureaucracy.
Beyond that gap, there is an increasing perception gap between farmers and consumers. These contribute to concern about the policy and regulatory environment.
It is a challenge to separate rhetoric from reality.
For example, stakeholders often say the government needs to consult more and that farmers need to be involved earlier in the policy process.
While it is hard to measure this, anecdotally, the government is consulting more than it has in recent history. It is more accurate to say there is a need for better engagement, not more engagement.
There is also talk about the need for a strategic vision or policy for the sector. However, the government has a Food Policy for Canada, is consulting on a Sustainable Agriculture Strategy and there is the five-year federal-provincial-territorial agreement.
It is more accurate to say the sector wants to write its own strategy, not that the government needs one.
Then there are increasing calls for governments to invest more in agriculture and food. However, Agriculture Canada is spending almost 40 per cent more than when the government changed in 2015.
So, it is not that the government needs to spend more, but that stakeholders want the money spent differently.
It is important to keep risks in perspective. That is why CAPI undertook dialogues to dive deeper into results of the first phase of the Agri-Food Risk Report. They will inform phase two, which will be released later this fall.
Mitigating risk is essential for any business, organization or sector to succeed. However, the first step is understanding that risk.
CAPI will continue to work with the sector to manage that risk and ensure optimism in the sector is well founded.
Tyler McCann is managing director of the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute.
