{"id":265167,"date":"2017-05-29T10:31:56","date_gmt":"2017-05-29T14:31:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/issues\/why-canada-needs-a-national-food-strategy\/"},"modified":"2025-10-07T21:37:49","modified_gmt":"2025-10-08T01:37:49","slug":"why-canada-needs-a-national-food-strategy","status":"publish","type":"issues","link":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2017\/05\/why-canada-needs-a-national-food-strategy\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Canada needs a national food strategy"},"content":{"rendered":"

When the idea of a national food strategy or policy is raised in Ottawa circles, it usually leads to more questions than answers. What is a national food strategy (or policy)? How will it work? More importantly, why<\/em> does Canada need one?<\/p>\n

While the first two questions are critically important, it\u2019s the last question we need to explore first. Many of us in the agri-food sector have spent years advocating for a national food policy \u2014 or, as the Canadian Federation of Agriculture would prefer to call it, a national food strategy<\/em>. (A strategy is inherently action-oriented, flexible and focused, whereas a policy suggests a more rigid direction.)<\/p>\n

There are two primary reasons why a national food strategy is important: we need a longer-term vision, and the plan needs to be aligned among the many players in the agri-food sector.<\/p>\n

Seeking a longer-term vision <\/strong><\/p>\n

Canadian farmers have grown accustomed to thinking about policy over five-year periods, as Canada\u2019s agricultural programs and policies are laid out in this five-year framework. This model was initially introduced in 2003 through a federal, provincial and territorial agreement, and farm programs have taken this format since then. This is the case with latest Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada plan, titled Growing Forward 2.<\/a> While over the years this five-year structure provided stability, farmers will tell you they feel considerable uncertainty as programs cycles approach their expiry dates, and they wonder what the next five years will bring in terms of priorities, policy and tools for managing their operations.<\/p>\n

These policy frameworks are generally limited to agricultural programs, and this is one of the core reasons why Canada should have a national food strategy. We need a long-term vision that connects agriculture with food policy and ties in to all other relevant areas \u2014 trade, environment, health and transportation, to name a few.<\/p>\n

Departmental alignment required<\/strong><\/p>\n

To illustrate this point, let\u2019s look at the issue of sustainability. Policy-makers generally accept that programs linked to \u201csustainability\u201d may impact all industries. However, the ease with which we discuss sustainability belies just how multifaceted a concept it really is. It incorporates many economic, environmental, social, health and cultural considerations that extend far beyond the mandate of any one department or industry segment. More importantly, all of these areas are connected, with interdependencies that further complicate the policy landscape, and this complexity can undermine governments\u2019 ability to achieve specific outcomes.<\/p>\n

The same is true of food policy. But unlike sustainability, food policy hasn\u2019t clearly been recognized for its many facets. To demonstrate the need to acknowledge the sector\u2019s interdependencies with other sectors, we need look no further than this year\u2019s federal budget<\/a>. Canada wants to increase annual agri-food exports to $75 billion by 2025 \u2013 an ambitious goal and one we in the industry believe is completely attainable, given the immense potential for growth, and provided the federal government implements policies that are coordinated among the departments involved.<\/p>\n

While Canada\u2019s farmers now produce more food with fewer resources, to increase our agri-food exports by nearly a half, we\u2019ll need more than gains in productivity. Significant growth in value-added production will be required, as well as innovation in everything from primary production to food processing, biofuels and other industrial, nonfood uses of agricultural products. This will involve an array of industries, academic fields and government departments, at all levels.<\/p>\n

Most of the players in the agri-food sector recognize that streamlined, science-based regulatory processes are essential if Canadian companies are to access and commercialize their products. However, policy-makers don\u2019t always recognize how innovation can be stifled by seemingly unrelated policy or regulatory changes that in fact have an impact on the agri-food sector. Take food labelling as an example: proposed regulations that would require alarmist health warnings about saturated fat, sugar, and\/or salt in food products could dampen growth prospects in our food processing sector. Not only could these warnings undermine the public\u2019s trust in many Canadian food products, they could hinder efforts to capture emerging markets and make Canada a less attractive place to invest.<\/p>\n

Another example is immigration pathways for agri-food workers. Although Employment and Social Development Canada has made efforts to help agricultural employers secure permanent residency for workers, other federal and provincial policies are simultaneously limiting those avenues. By taking a cross-cutting, comprehensive look at conflicting policies, Canada could develop a program to promote immigrant pathways into agriculture and other rural industries, and resolve the chronic issues farm operators face because many full-time, permanent agricultural positions remain unfilled.<\/p>\n

Finally, carbon pricing policies also have an impact on the agricultural sector. Policies that differ from one province to the other may undermine competitiveness for agricultural producers due to higher costs and farmers\u2019 position as price-takers in the market (meaning they aren\u2019t able to pass on or recoup the higher costs of production). Unless policies reward carbon sequestration and offsets in agriculture, an imposed carbon pricing system could significantly increase production costs, making Canadian products less competitive on a global scale and reducing our export potential. Farmers have made great strides in reducing GHG emissions over the past 20 years, but policy hasn\u2019t evolved to recognize these efficiencies.<\/p>\n

These examples illustrate how policy decisions in one sector can confound the objectives of other sectors. When we consider the many ways that food touches our daily lives, we can see the complexity of the food policy landscape. This understanding is critical if we are to succeed in reaching the objective set in the 2017 federal budget: to increase agri-food exports by 2025.<\/p>\n

So how can we coordinate all this more effectively? We must answer the first question I posed above: what is a national food policy? Put simply, it\u2019s a long-term policy and program framework that would help build a more socially responsible, profitable and environmentally sustainable agri-food sector that contributes to the health of all Canadians; one that recognizes the multitude of stakeholders. How would it work? Or, more accurately, given that the government is currently developing a national food policy, how should<\/em> it work?<\/p>\n

According to the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, to ensure lasting, meaningful change in how food policy is developed, the federal government focus on the following four key principles:<\/p>\n