Food, Fear, and Affordability Discussion Panel Reflections
2026 marked the 10th anniversary of Canada’s Agriculture Day, a celebration of how our food is produced and the people who produce it. Hosted by Farm & Food Care Saskatchewan, we at SAIFood chose to participate in Food, Fear, and Affordability to discuss the challenges plaguing food systems. There are undoubtedly numerous ways for Canada to improve our competitiveness and versatility, as the last few years of climatic and geopolitical uncertainty have revealed. However, despite the panel’s title, the discussion leaned deeply into the theme of day: recognition for existing quality.
Price of Policy
It can be difficult to summarize an entire supply chain’s worth of issues into one predominant problem and yet, all three panelists seemed to agree on one theme behind inefficiency. Food systems are speckled with greed. From the tradeoffs made in the field to processing decisions to retail mechanisms, there are unfortunately numerous occasions where shareholders focus on the dollar value of food. There are opportunities to be economically aggressive, but not when land quality is the sacrifice or when Canadians are in a cost-of-living crisis.
Dr. Sylvain Charlebois, of the annual Canada Food Price Reports, points to shrinkflation (reducing the size/weight of a product but offering it for the same price) and price blackout cycles (the inflated price jump in October and February to get around the period between where prices cannot be raised) as classic examples of widespread corporate greed in our retail systems. These realities informed the voluntary Grocery Code of Conduct, which attempts to reduce price volatility upstream by ensuring fairness between grocery store and supplier.
A misunderstanding of how food systems operate and the role those dynamics have on other steps in the supply chain can breed equally misinformed policy. Agriculture frequently requires consideration of the future, anticipating land performance based on today’s practices; retailers must focus on the immediate, which tends to be more reactive. Overly reactionary policy can sacrifice long term success. For this reason, diversifying Canada’s trade and production prospects would benefit the reputation we have (geopolitically) gained in recent months, however our ability to do so will always be at the whim of realistic economic barriers.
Glancing Over the Fence
Indigenous youth in Canada are familiar with economic barriers to agriculture. Starting, despite government funding options, is daunting, but begins with an interest in working the land. Terry Lerat (Cowessess First Nations) founded 4C Farms and their cattle herd terrified and in recognition that the land shows its stewards what its best used for. If grain doesn’t grow, perhaps the soil is better suited for grasslands and cattle. Improving the land quality such that it can host livestock or, even better, encourage future generations to partake in agriculture, those should be preferred over maximizing land productivity or the profitability of the acre.
Similar sentiments were echoed by Dr. Mitch Weegman (Ducks Unlimited Canada Endowed Chair in Wetland and Waterfowl Conservation; University of Saskatchewan). Given the increasing prevalence of drought conditions, wetlands are becoming increasingly necessary for Prairie productivity but wetland conservation eats into farmers’ usable acres. Wetland management is fundamental for land quality and can be a way to make money out of traditionally unprofitable land.
However, communicating the benefits of ecological prioritization can be an upward battle, requiring long term relationship building to gain a small amount of trust. Mr. Lerat remarks that the food system and production can only become better by making people better, and Dr. Weegman follows that receptivity to targetted messages is built by prior connections but does not guarantee change. Our role as agricultural communicators and educators is to inform rather than prescribe definitive conclusions; to paraphrase Dr. Charlebois: accurate information is a step toward good democracy.
Concluding Remarks
The events of Canada’s Agriculture Day were nothing short of hopeful. The panel, as well, recognised the quality of our food systems and the efforts of our farmers. While imperfect and susceptible to traditional economic over prioritization, Canada’s role as a food leader could be benefited by greater focus on upstream supply chain actors. The conversations necessary for farmers to improve their lands for future generations are well underway, offering Canada the chance to excel ecologically, economically, and culturally.
