Canada finds itself in a curious position regarding agricultural research – it has a large infrastructure for research but it lacks a focused approach to mobilizing those resources. There is a significant presence of both private and public sector involvement, but they need to work together in a co-ordinated way to make the most of the resources available.

The private sector brings an estimated $100 million annually to seed R&D, a large proportion of the estimated global commitment of $1 billion. That money is directed primarily into three crops: canola, corn, and soybeans – to great success. Innovation in these crops is leading to healthier food, earlier maturity dates, and improved pest resistance. Private sector investment exists in other crops but in a much more limited manner.

So, this creates a need to look at the resources flowing into other crops and maximize their use. For that matter, there is discussion of the role for an overarching ag research policy in Canada. Indeed, there seems to be growing recognition of the need for such a policy and I couldn’t agree more.

Unfortunately, the recent consultations around Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s research program (the largest single public sector research initiative in agriculture) do not add materially to this goal. There is a strong need to set policy and then fit AAFC’s goals into that plan. A look at ag research today tells you the tasks and opportunities are mammoth – a job far too big for one organization. The tax resources the government is dedicating to ag research are not enough, nor are they likely to be. Instead, leveraging resources from universities, provinces, grower funds, charitable institutions, and the private sector will need to be part of the path forward. There is more than enough room for everybody to participate and be part of the plan.

If you look at the focus offered in Australia by their funding system, albeit working largely for the public sector, there is a real opportunity to make progress on core issues. In Canada, I’d offer some of the following priorities:

1. Focus on agriculture as the sector to deliver renewable products,

2. Protect and preserve animal genetic resources in a formal system, 

3. Focus on plant breeding and plant technology to deliver new traits for specialized uses,

4. Develop a fund to support development and application testing of processing systems.

5. Profile crops and species where certain groups can take a lead – for instance, focus the federal government on cereals research in a meaningful way. 

One of the driving principles should be insertion of desirable traits straight into plant seed. Processes will need to be developed to create a polyester-like material from oilseeds, and to create bioenergy from plant fibre. Just the same, those processes are most efficient if the optimal traits are inserted right at the start, with the seed. Of course, this demands a more flexible registration process. Hopefully the improvements currently contemplated to the contract registration process will be the start to creating a framework for just such innovation.

Robynne Anderson can be reached at robynne@issuesink.com.

June 2006