what we’ve heard - canadian horticultural council · questionnaires, and held over 75 meetings...

What We’ve Heard

THE NEXT AGRICULTURAL POLICY FRAMEWORK

October 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Message From the Minister ...................................................................2

Executive Summary .................................................................................3

Introduction ................................................................................................. 5

Opportunities Identified by the Sector ...............................................6

How Growing Forward 2 is Working ...................................................9

Future Engagement ................................................................................ 15

Annex A: Industry Groups at the National Engagement Session ................ 16

Annex B: Overview of Online Consultation Results .........................................17

What We’ve Heard | THE NEXT AGRICULTURAL POLICY FRAMEWORK | October 2016

2

MESSAGE FROM THE MINISTER

One of the enduring innovations in Federal-Provincial-Territorial (FPT) agriculture relations is the FPT agreement to coordinate policy and programming with what have become known as “policy frameworks”. For nearly 15 years, FPT governments have relied on agricultural policy frameworks to ensure a collaborative approach that encourages investment, adaptation and sustainable growth in the agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector. As Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food, my mandate includes implementing a new agricultural policy framework to replace the current framework, which ends in 2018.

A well-designed and effective agricultural policy framework will help ensure that Canada’s agriculture sector remains a world leader. As worldwide economic growth improves, our agriculture and agri-food sector will be well-positioned to sell Canadian products to an expanding global middle class. I am committed to establishing an agricultural policy framework that enables the sector to take advantage of such opportunities. The next policy framework will also create excellent opportunities for the growth and prosperity of Canada’s middle class.

To help meet these objectives, my provincial and territorial colleagues and I have been consulting with Canadians and the sector to help inform the development of the next policy framework. I have personally met with many stakeholders across the country during these consultations and appreciate all the feedback that I have received.

This report offers highlights of what we have heard at sessions and through our online questionnaire. Comments received were carefully considered and helped to inform the Calgary Statement, which was released at the annual conference of FPT Ministers of Agriculture on July 22, 2016. The statement outlines the key priority areas for the next agricultural policy framework.

I would like to thank everyone who has participated in the consultation process to date. Your input is important. I encourage all Canadians to participate in the online questionnaire which can be found on Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s website. This questionnaire is focused on the Calgary Statement and will help inform discussions as FPT governments develop a new multilateral framework agreement. There will also be a number of upcoming opportunities for the sector to participate in meetings and various thematic engagement sessions.

I am confident that together we can ensure that Canada continues to have a strong, vibrant and competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector.

Sincerely,

Lawrence MacAulay, PC, MP

http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/about-us/key-departmental-initiatives/developing-the-next-agricultural-policy-framework/calgary-statement-towards-the-next-policy-framework/?id=1468864509649

https://agr.sondages-surveys.ca/surveys/AAFC/next-agricultural-policy-framework/?l=en

http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/about-us/public-opinion-and-consultations/share-your-experiences-and-ideas-for-the-next-agricultural-policy-framework/?id=1461767905189


3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report offers summaries of what Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) heard during consultations with stakeholders on the development of the next agricultural policy framework. Throughout this process, AAFC has focused on three questions:

1. What is working well under Growing Forward 2 (GF2)?

2. What are potential improvements to GF2?

3. What should be in the next policy framework (NPF)?

Stakeholders provided input through (1) a National Engagement Session on June 9, 2016, (2) various meetings with sector representatives, (3) an online questionnaire which ran from May 9 to July 31, 2016, and (4) comments submitted by e-mail and standard mail to AAFC. To date, AAFC has heard from over 300 industry groups, reviewed 320 completed online questionnaires, and held over 75 meetings with stakeholders.

Opportunities

During the engagement process stakeholders identified a number of key opportunities that could further enhance Canada’s growth and competitiveness. Among these opportunities, a number of key themes emerged:

• Fostering science, research and innovation;

• Adapting to climate change;

• Investing in market access and development;

• Helping the sector maintain public trust and consumer confidence through education and awareness;

• Increasing funding for and effectiveness of Business Risk Management (BRM) programs;

• Supporting farm transition and succession planning;

• Addressing labour shortages in the sector;

• Emphasizing the importance of Canada’s value-added sector; and

• Simplifying Canada’s domestic regulatory framework.

4


Feedback on Growing Forward 2

In terms of what has worked well under GF2, stakeholders recognized the importance of the suite of BRM programs for managing risks. They were pleased with how the framework helped to bring key stakeholders together, funding flexibility under various GF2 programs, and other initiatives that made programs more responsive to individual needs.

Stakeholders also provided suggestions on a number of potential areas for improvement, including more streamlined program administration, more flexibility for recipients in how funding may be used, and increased transparency and decision speed in the approval process. Some stakeholders noted a desire for more consistency in provincially and territorially-funded programs across the country and many identified a need for longer-term funding to support growth, research and innovation programming.

There was also a desire to increase funding for a range of issues including education and awareness, knowledge dissemination and technology transfer, the food processing sector, Indigenous communities, women in agriculture, and small and emerging sectors.

Continuing Engagement

This report describes what was heard during the consultation process which informed priority areas discussed by FPT officials and led to the creation of the Calgary Statement. The feedback received represents an interim step in the consultation process for the NPF. Engagement with Canadians and the sector will be critical as FPT governments continue to develop policy direction for the next framework. AAFC will continue its consultation by seeking input from the sector and interested Canadians through additional online consultations, thematic engagement sessions and other meetings with industry representatives.


5

INTRODUCTION

In preparation for the development of Canada’s next agricultural policy framework, federal, provincial and territorial (FPT) governments undertook a series of consultations with Canadians and the agriculture, agri-food and agri-based processing sector (the sector). Beginning in early 2016, efforts were made to engage Canadians and the sector directly in order to better understand both their experience under the current framework, Growing Forward 2 (GF2), and how they believe the next framework could be improved.

There were four principal engagement mechanisms through which consultation has occurred (more detailed information can be found in the annexes of this report):

1. National Engagement Session On June 9, 2016, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) held a session in Ottawa with 71 industry representatives. The session was an opportunity for a direct dialogue between the sector and FPT governments on the key issues, challenges and opportuni-ties facing the agriculture and agri-food sector today.

2. Online Consultations From May 9 to July 31, 2016, Canadians were invited to submit feedback on GF2 in the form of an online questionnaire. 320 completed surveys were received from farmers, agri-food processors, as well as from Canadians not directly involved in the sector.

3. Other Meetings with Sector Representatives Since the fall of 2015, over 75 meetings, value chain roundtables, and events were held with over 290 producers, agri-food processors, and industry associations.

4. Comments Submitted by E-mail and Standard Mail AAFC received over 40 written submissions from stakeholders offering feedback on GF2 and suggestions for the NPF.

Stakeholder feedback and suggestions captured through these fora provided valuable perspectives and information that helped inform the Calgary Statement, which was released at the annual conference of FPT Ministers of Agriculture on July 22, 2016. Ministers discussed increasing market access and development, advancing investments in science, innovation and research, the need for a strong science-based regulatory framework, enhancing public trust, the continued importance of BRM programs and systems such as supply management, and renewed emphasis on environmental sustainability and climate change. As engagement continues, similar fora will be used for consultation, but focus will shift to soliciting feedback from Canadians and the sector on the priorities and direction outlined in the Calgary Statement.

This report summarizes what we heard leading up to the Calgary Statement, with key messages and suggestions highlighted throughout. In addition, annexes offer more detailed information received through the various engagement mechanisms. This report seeks to capture the essence of all the ideas that arose during the consultation process but, as it is a summary of engagement, does not include every comment received.


6

OPPORTUNITIES IDENTIFIED BY THE SECTOR

Representatives of the sector identified a number of opportunities during the engagement process that could further enhance Canada’s growth and competitiveness. The agriculture sector faces a number of important challenges, including growing consumer demands and expectations, maintaining public trust and social license, technical trade barriers, growing competition in global markets, and climate change. Access to qualified labour also remains a top issue for industry. Beyond these challenges, there were other opportunities identified for the growth of the sector.

Among these, a number of key themes emerged:

• Fostering science, research and innovation;

• Adapting to the environmental agenda and climate change;

• Investing in Market Access and Development;

• Helping the sector maintain public trust and consumer confidence through education and awareness;

• Increasing funding for and effectiveness of BRM programs;

• Supporting farm transition and succession planning;

• Addressing labour shortages in the sector;

• Emphasizing the importance of Canada’s value-added sector; and

• Simplifying Canada’s domestic regulatory framework.

Science, Research and Innovation Science, research and innovation remain a top priority for the sector. Without sufficient investment in this area, Canada will struggle to remain globally competitive. The success of the GF2 AgriInnovation Program clearly demonstrates the opportunity for continued success in innovation. Farmers and food processors need to be able to adopt new technologies and innovative practices to raise productivity levels and respond faster and better to consumer demands. There are many examples of innovation and collaboration across the agriculture sector and success stories can be communicated out to encourage more investments in innovation.

Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change An environmental focus is seen to be important. The new framework should be supportive of government-wide efforts on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategies, while driving production practices that are environmentally friendly. There are enormous opportunities to continue to promote the adoption of on-farm environmentally sustainable practices (e.g. clean tech). Strategies to mitigate the impact of climate change should involve investing in technologies and practices that will reduce carbon emissions, responding to

7


changing and extreme weather, improving yields and increasing the energy efficiency of farm operations. The agriculture sector has the potential to contribute significantly to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. An emissions trading scheme in Canada could offer farmers an economic return for reducing these emissions. Programming in the NPF should help enhance the ability of Canadian agricultural producers to act on opportunities offered by climate change.

Market Access The ability to access new and emerging markets while expanding existing markets remains a tremendous growth opportunity for the agriculture sector and must remain a priority. It was noted that the NPF should reflect a focus on growing exports and addressing barriers to trade and regulatory issues.

Value-Added ProcessingSome stakeholders noted that food processing companies do not receive the same amount of support as commodity groups and primary producers do. Food processing companies can also face difficulties in accessing export markets, as trade agreements focus on commodity groups.

BRM ProgrammingStakeholders recognized the importance of the suite of BRM programs for managing risks and see it as a vital component of the NPF. The sector is broadly supportive of the BRM suite but most stakeholders would like to see increased funding of the programs. It was indicated that the predictability and timeliness of program payments could be improved as it can be difficult for producers to predict their coverage level and when a program will pay (detailed comments on BRM programming can be found on pages 10-13).

Public TrustThe sector indicated that building public trust should be a key focus in the next framework. While public trust is slow to build, it can be eroded very quickly. Consumer education and awareness activities are critical to building public trust and programming should be reflective of this important need. There is an appetite for government to better explain the safety record of the food supply and regulatory infrastructure that has been established. This can combat misinformation being spread through social media and will reinforce to Canadians and consumers worldwide that Canada has one of the best regulated food systems in the world, which can help reinforce public confidence in Canada’s food production systems.

Labour Shortages Access to qualified labour is a major issue for the sector. Stakeholders noted that improving the image of industry and agriculture can help spur interest in industry investment and address labour shortages. The NPF is an opportunity to focus on addressing labour shortages by attracting and retaining skilled workers. One key opportunity is to develop and implement a strategy to increase the involvement of youth in agriculture. The strategy should focus on improving the public image of agriculture as a viable career choice amongst youth, educating youth on the wide range of opportunities in the field, and providing programming that caters specifically to youth and women.

8


Farm Transition and Succession Planning According to the 2011 Census of Agriculture, the median age of farm operators was 54. With the coming wave of retirements, a stronger focus on farm transition and new entrants is suggested. Investing in training and skills development, succession planning, farm transition and overall business planning would help enable knowledge transfer and the migration of producer operations from those seeking to retire to the next generation of farmers. Given the health of the sector and developments in agricultural technology, it was suggested that now is a great time to generate enthusiasm and interest in agriculture careers though engaging youth and encouraging new entrants.

Domestic Regulations Outdated regulations and a slow regulatory modernization process are seen as barriers to innovation. Stakeholders felt that Canada’s regulatory framework is too complex and difficult to navigate and has a lack of alignment between federal and provincial regulations.


9

HOW GROWING FORWARD 2 IS WORKING

What Works Well under GF2

Stakeholders expressed views on many aspects of GF2 which they believe are currently working well. Feedback on the performance of GF2 touched upon a number of areas, including federal programming and the suite of BRM programs. Federal programming is seen largely as an important way to provide targeted support to the sector in areas such as innovation and market access. Stakeholders indicated that flexible FPT cost-shared programs are key to addressing regional needs.

Other Feedback Received• GF2 has helped bring key stakeholders together, including regional associations, traders,

exporters and growers, which has helped resolve supply chain issues.

• Provincial and program funding flexibility under GF2 has been well received, however stakeholders emphasized it should not create disadvantages between producers in different provinces related to program availability and awareness.

What Works in GF2 ProgramsFederal-Only Programming What Works Well under GF2

AgriInnovation:

• From an innovation point of view, GF2 is generally perceived as having been successful.

• The Agri-Science Clusters have been effective in helping to foster collaboration across the country, encouraging industry to focus on national priorities and minimize duplication of efforts in science.

• Most stakeholders would like to see the program continue in the next framework.

AgriMarketing:

• The program has helped industry to capitalize on market opportu-nities as well as gain and maintain access to foreign markets, while also encouraging private investment in the sector.

• The Assurance Systems stream has worked well and increased the sector’s competitiveness by helping it meet market demands for verifiable assurance claims for its products.

• Many stakeholders indicated their desire to see the program con-tinue in the next framework.

10


AgriCompetitiveness:

• The Value Chain Roundtables (VCRTs) have been valuable to the sector and should be maintained in the NPF. Several representa-tives of the sector noted that the VCRTs allowed for enhanced consultation and coordination in their industry.

• Business Development Program funding has also been effective.

• Competitiveness is an area stakeholders would like the federal government to focus on. They noted the importance of having access to the proper tools and operating environment to support competitiveness.

• Some would like to see this program expanded and to receive greater funding.

BRM Programming (Cost-Shared with

Provinces and Territories)

What Works Well under GF2

AgriInsurance:• Producers like this program as it helps minimize the effects of

production losses. The importance of the program in dealing with unpredictable climate conditions was emphasized.

AgriInvest:• Stakeholders generally would like to see this program expanded

and to receive greater funding.

AgriStability:

• There was recognition that this program works well for monoculture farms and for occasional losses (e.g., 1 or 2 losses over a 5 year period).

• Producers also noted that it is important that AgriStability continue to respond to their individual situation.

AgriRecovery:• It was expressed that the AgriRecovery program has been

important for mitigating certain unexpected events, such as viruses in fruit crops.

There is consensus that effective BRM programming is important for farmers to manage risk from market volatility and natural phenomenon like weather, disease and pests. The sector is broadly supportive of the BRM suite but most stakeholders would like to see increased funding of the programs. No specific suggestions were made as to where these new funds should be sourced, or what existing investments should be diverted into BRM programming.

Potential Improvements to GF2

Certain aspects of GF2 federal programming were identified as potential areas for improvement. Some stakeholders noted that the reporting requirements for BRM and non-BRM programming were considered burdensome and took resources away from doing other work, which could

11


particularly burden small businesses and new entrants. There was also a desire to have greater flexibility to move funding from year to year for multi-year projects. Stakeholders suggested information flow could potentially be improved by establishing a “one-stop-shop” for information on programs and eligibility requirements. This, and creating other advisory services to assist and support applicants in understanding what programs are available to them, would be beneficial to the sector.

Other Feedback Received• Varying levels of awareness of programs and opportunities across Canada: Raise aware-

ness and knowledge of available programs through advertising and promotional activities to enable consistent program uptake across Canada.

• Difficulties in navigating programs: Enhance clarity of objectives and program requirements. Establish a “one-stop-shop” for information to foster a greater understanding of programs and eligibility requirements. Provide advisory services to assist and support applicants in understanding what programs are accessible to them.

• The application process is too onerous.

• Slow project review and funding decision approval process: Clarify funding approval process and timelines. Communicate decision rationale to applicants and ensure decisions move at the speed of business.

• Heavy reporting requirements: BRM and non-BRM programming requirements take resources away from doing the work (burden for small farmers and new entrants).

• Lack of flexibility to move funds from year to year for multi-year projects.

• Lack of transparency in AgriInnovation funding decisions: Increase transparency of available and remaining funding in each program. Report on when, to where, to whom, and for what project funding has been allocated.

• Lack of standardization between programs with regard to eligible in-kind contributions: Clarify or standardize definition of in-kind contributions. Consider providing more oppor-tunity for in-kind matching for small businesses.

• Education and Awareness: Agriculture awareness is not a key pillar in the current framework and public education and awareness activities are not eligible under GF2 programs.

• Support for the Food Processing Sector: Under GF2 programming, support is lacking. Trade agreements focus on commodity groups, while food processing companies face difficulties in accessing export markets. More needs to be done so that the entire value chain can grow. This includes investing in infrastructure, innovation, and domestic and international market development to further strengthen the processing sector.

• Programming for Indigenous Communities: Certain agricultural programs are not designed to consider the unique need of Indigenous communities, such as the Canadian Agricultural Loans Act (CALA) Program. Indigenous Peoples are an important element in

12


the future of Canadian agriculture and agri-food. AAFC should seek to remove barriers to participation and tailor programs to the needs of Indigenous communities to allow them to benefit from the NPF and increase their involvement in the agriculture sector.

• Farm Financial Planning does not seem to be addressed in current programming: Many farmers struggle with human resources, budget, debt servicing, and risk management plans. Programming could address this need.

• Knowledge Dissemination and Technology Transfer: GF2 programming focuses on research, innovation and knowledge creation but does not focus sufficiently on knowledge dissemination, technology transfer, and commercialization.

• Support for women in agriculture: The lack of female representation on agriculture boards, committees and in upper management in agri-related businesses is a significant issue. It is important to get women more involved in agriculture while recognizing their strengths.

• Funding Opportunities for Small and Emerging Sectors: Special consideration should be given to how to support small and emerging sectors in accessing funding to help get them on their feet.

• Support for Plant and Animal Health initiatives seems to be missing from the framework: These are major issues that need attention and appropriate funding by the Federal Government.

• Advance Payments Program (APP): General lack of awareness and training among producers and financial institutions with regard to how to access the APP program has resulted in missed opportunities to leverage funding, which is a major issue for crop sectors.

• It is important to ensure the NPF is responsive to the different realities of the sector: The framework needs to reflect the diversity of the sector and not provide an advantage to one group over another.

• There is a need to develop a common vision and long-term strategy for the agriculture sector: As in other countries, this would help align the industry towards common goals and help build a competitive edge.

• The framework should encourage more cross-sector collaboration: There is an important opportunity for more collaboration within the agriculture and agri-food sector and among other sectors.

• Consistency in programming between GF2 and the NPF is critical: Announcing the NPF as early as possible will allow for program continuity and a smooth transition, which is important to the sector.

• Contribution agreements are not always completed on time.

• Absence of longer-term financing to support growth and innovation.

• Allocation of 8% towards administration insufficient to cover the cost of audits and other activities.

13


• Need for more alignment between various initiatives: e.g., environmental farm plans and sustainability initiatives.

• Lack of consistency between Provincial-Territorial funded programs across the country: e.g., premises identification and environmental farm plans.

Potential Improvements to GF2 ProgramsFederal-Only Programming Potential Improvements under GF2

AgriInnovation:

• Some stakeholders felt there has been a lack of transparency in AgriInnovation funding decisions. There has been interest from the sector to have access to this information, especially with respect to which projects received funding.

• One stakeholder indicated that all projects should be evaluated by merit rather than on a “first come, first serve” basis. It was also expressed that a 25% industry to 75% AAFC cost-sharing ratio would be preferred to the current 50/50 formula.

AgriMarketing:

• The timeliness of approval of the AgriMarketing program could be improved.

• Expenditures such as promotional items and hospitality should be eligible expenses. Some smaller associations find the cost to access the program prohibitive.

• A 25% industry to 75% AAFC cost-sharing ratio would be preferred to the current 50/50 formula.

AgriCompetitiveness:• A 25% industry to 75% AAFC cost-sharing ratio would be preferred

to the current 50/50 formula.

BRM Programming (Cost-Shared with

Provinces and Territories)

Potential Improvements under GF2

AgriInsurance:• Some stakeholders would like to see expanded commodity

coverage for small and emerging products.

AgriInvest:• A number of stakeholders indicated that an increase to the current

1% allowable net sales would be preferred.

14


AgriStability:

• Many stakeholders indicated that they would like the AgriStability trigger restored to 85% of the producer’s reference margin, up from the 70% level under GF2.

• Timeliness of the program remains an issue. Many have said that the program takes too long to pay out and that it is difficult for producers to estimate their payment in advance (i.e., program bankability).

• Others expressed a view that the fee should be waived for the first five years of enrolment in order to encourage beginning farmers’ participation.

• There was also a view that the program was not viable for many producers and does not effectively work for smaller or diversified farms.

AgriRecovery:

• It was expressed that measures available in the program should be more clearly defined, such as those measures aimed at providing assistance to natural disasters.

• It is unclear when a payment would be triggered under this program.


15

FUTURE ENGAGEMENT

This report describes what was heard during the consultation process which informed priority areas discussed by FPT officials and led to the creation of the Calgary Statement. AAFC will continue its consultation by seeking input from the sector and interested Canadians, which will include targeted engagement focusing on the priority areas outlined in the Statement. A number of engagement activities will be used to achieve this objective, including:

1. Online Consultations From July 22 to November 30, 2016, Canadians are invited to submit their feedback on the Calgary Statement in an online questionnaire on the AAFC website. The results of this survey will be used to inform discussions with FPT governments as they negotiate a new multilateral framework agreement.

2. Thematic Engagement Sessions Two engagement sessions, each with different themes, are being organized to solicit feedback from stakeholders on the priorities identified in the Calgary Statement. The first session will be held on October 12-13, 2016 and address (i) science, research and innovation, (ii) public trust, (iii) environmental sustainability and climate change and (iv) labour, business development and competitiveness. The second session will be held on November 1-2, 2016 and address (i) international markets and trade, (ii) value-added agriculture and agri-food processing and (iii) risk management.

3. Other Meetings with Sector Representatives FPT governments and officials will continue to meet with the sector in a variety of settings during the development of the next framework. These meetings will provide valuable feedback on the direction and priorities being considered.

Conclusion

Engagement with Canadians and the sector is critical as FPT governments continue to develop policy direction for the next framework. Canada’s agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector is both complex and dynamic. Through understanding the successes and challenges of the current agricultural policy framework, the sector can be better supported and positioned to succeed in a competitive and ever-evolving global marketplace.

http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/about-us/key-departmental-initiatives/developing-the-next-agricultural-policy-framework/calgary-statement-towards-the-next-policy-framework/?id=1468864509649

https://agr.sondages-surveys.ca/surveys/AAFC/next-agricultural-policy-framework/?l=en


16

ANNEX A: Industry Groups at the National Engagement Session

4-H Canada Ag in the Classroom Canada Alberta Federation of Agriculture British Columbia Agriculture Council Canada Grains Council Canada Organic Trade Association Canadian Agricultural Safety Association Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance Canadian Beef Breeds Council Canadian Canola Growers Association Canadian Cattle Identification Agency Canadian Cattlemen’s Association Canadian Council of Food Processors Canadian Co-operative Association Canadian Credit Union Association Canadian Federation of Agriculture Canadian Federation of Independent Business Canadian Food Exporters Association Canadian Hemp Trade Alliance Canadian Highly Migratory Species Foundation Canadian Honey Council Canadian Horticulture Council Canadian Institute of Food Science and Technology Canadian International Grains Institute Canadian Livestock Genetics Association Canadian Meat Council Canadian Organic Growers Association Canadian Pasta Manufacturers Association Canadian Pork Council Canadian Produce Marketing Association Canadian Renderers Association Canadian Renewable Fuels Association Canadian Seed Growers Association Canadian Sheep Federation

Canadian Sugar Institute Canadian Swine Exporters Association Canadian Vintners Association

Canadian Young Farmers Forum

Canola Council of Canada Cereals Canada Chicken Farmers of Canada Community Economic Development and Employability Canada CropLife Canada Dairy Farmers of Canada Dairy Processors Association of Canada Ducks Unlimited (Canada) Egg Farmers of Canada Employability Corporation Farm Credit Canada Farm Management Canada Fertilizer Canada Flax Council of Canada Flowers Canada Growers Food and Consumer Products of Canada Food Processors of Canada Genome Canada Grain Growers of Canada L’Union des producteurs agricoles National Aboriginal Agricultural Association Limited National Cattle Feeders’ Association National Farm Animal Care Council National Farmers Union National Sunflower Association of Canada Nova Scotia Federation of Agriculture Ontario Federation of Agriculture

Organic Federation of Canada Réseau de développement économique et d’employabilité du Canada School of Fisheries (Memorial University) Soil Conservation Council of Canada Soy Canada


17

ANNEX B: Overview of Online Consultation Results

This first questionnaire was designed to gather feedback on Growing Forward 2 (GF2). The survey ran from May 9 to July 31, 2016. A total of 320 completed responses were received.

Respondent Self-Identification

Agriculture Organization/Association: 72 Consumer: 34 Dairy producers: 17 Food or Beverage Processor: 21 Grains and Oilseeds Producers: 97 Industry: 23 Livestock Producer: 81 Non-Agriculture Organization/Association: 11 Other: 69 Poultry and Egg Producer: 20 Pulses and Special Crops: 27 Vegetables, Fruits and Non-Edible Horticulture: 42

*please note the total does not add to 320 as respondents could identify as more than one group

Issue Mention Count

AgriInnovation: 23 AgriInsurance: 13 AgriInvest: 70 AgriCompetitiveness: 8 AgriMarketing: 35 AgriRecovery: 8 AgriStability: 89 Animal Health/Plant Health: 6 Business Risk Management: 35 Collaboration: 29 Climate Change/Environmental Sustainability: 51 Food Processing/Value-Added: 13 Innovation: 89 Labour: 10 Market Access/Market Development: 34 Public Trust/Social Licence: 14 Regulation: 22 Research: 101 Succession/New Farm: 56 Science: 19

what we’ve heard - canadian horticultural council · questionnaires, and held over 75 meetings...

Documents