Why Agriculture Needs Open Collaboration
Is it me, or have times changed? As a child of the 90s, having been raised post Soviet Union’s fall and Eastern Europe joining the global market, we saw a boost in globalization and liberalization. Heck, the world was our oyster, suddenly with access to the World Wide Web and eBay. But it now seems that times are changing; we live in an era where nationalism and protectionism are reshaping trade, technology, and research. It is seen in politics, trade, and consumerism. Try not to notice a sign boasting a proudly made Canadian good, or a sticker with a ‘T’ for tariffed goods these days. It seems like national pride (Yay) and protectionism (not yay) are sweeping in from all aspects.
Agriculture is no exception. Food security is inherently global; no country can solve it alone. In Canada, we wouldn’t be as successful as we are without access to global foods, inputs, and technology. Other nations are also facing this same concern, and so are the CGIAR Centers and Models. This model of international collaboration is under pressure thanks to this shift in protectionism and funding, and yet the mission of researching outputs of this model may be more vital than ever.
The Rise of Protectionism
Now, there is a difference between having national pride and taking protective measures. Go ahead, take pride in your nation, but don’t forget that we are not the only ones capable of doing what you are likely celebrating (unless we’re talking sports pride, then no one is better than us at hockey; it’s part of our Canadian DNA). This growing trend of protectionism is not exclusive to agriculture; it is everywhere. There is digital protectionism, in which nations, such as China, limit access to online material to ‘protect’ their citizens, and restrict the sharing of intellectual properties, new technologies, or data. In the tech world, we are seeing protectionist measures being made over microchips, semiconductors, and processors. These chips, which we saw a limit of during the Pandemic, are critical components to supercomputers, automobiles, AI, and much more; China and the US have been fighting for protection over the right to control this market and be the dominant player.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, we saw the perfect storm of trade protectionism emerge for national safety and security. Not with the science of creating the vaccine, but everything else. Regular goods were seeing limited trade, but also medical products such as garments and ventilators became hoarded as protective goods. Today, we are seeing protectionism spread in the form of tariffs, domestic requirements being placed on electric goods, and the restriction of trade, such as Canadian canola into China. In agriculture, we are experiencing an increasingly restricted seed sharing, germplasm exchange, and agricultural technology transfer, which limits farmers’ ability to adapt to and excel in changing production environments.
Impacts on Agricultural Research
We have already established that agriculture is really a global market. In the modern era we live in, no single nation can supply all the agricultural needs for itself. Whether it be food, crop inputs, technology, or researchers, it’s a global effort. Sadly, that doesn’t mean that agriculture and its research aren’t tested and impacted by this global movement away from collaboration and towards national protectionism.
The most obvious example today is the tariffs we are seeing on agricultural inputs. Currently, the USA has imposed several tariffs on agricultural goods with numerous trade partners, including Canada. As a result, we have seen retaliatory tariffs imposed on goods and services coming from the USA, but we have also seen a shift in trade. This protectionist move by the US government now leaves American farmers with limited access to export markets and higher prices for inputs such as fertilizer and seed. It has also meant a scramble by trade partners like Canada to adapt and find new markets and logistics for moving product, as their biggest trading partner and neighbour is now limiting access to the market.
Protectionism is not all about limiting access to goods; it can also be applied to services and resources, like research and science. Currently, CGIAR (a non-profit agricultural science consortium) has a gene bank safeguarding 770,000+ accessions. If nations restrict access or provision of new samples , global breeding efforts will stall. But perhaps more importantly, if nations take a more protective approach to funding their own research rather than supporting the global efforts of science like CGIAR, we may find ourselves with limited genetic diversity of crops and animals to meet the growing concerns of our world.
Brain Drain of Limiting Research
While we will discuss the fate of dwindling funding for global sciences in a future blog, this act of withdrawing funds from the public or global benefit will have a lasting impact on agricultural research. Within CGIAR alone, there are 15 centers with a focus on meeting the agricultural challenges of food, land, climate, and policy. However, if funds become limited for such ventures, it means either new funds need to be found or these research centers and their collaboration must pick what is a priority, what waits for funding, and what gets scrapped.
Coming from the world of academia, we have heard many stories from colleagues at American universities and centres within CGIAR about the USDA cuts directly impacting their research. Labs have closed, and centres have pivoted and refocused both their research efforts and their funding plans. In many disciplines, this will reduce the number of highly trained experts available to enter the workforce. Many young scientists may leave international research if funding and collaboration dry up, and look for work elsewhere.
Why Protectionism Hurts Everyone
Food systems are interconnected. A drought in Africa affects grain prices in Asia. A pest outbreak in Latin America can threaten crops in Europe. A tariff placed on Canadian fertilizers increases the cost of US crops. We know that restricting collaboration only weakens resilience, yet we still seem to see our political world driving us into a period of protectionism rather than global collaboration and support.
In agriculture, protectionism doesn’t just disrupt trade, it fragments the very systems that enable innovation and adaptation. When nations restrict access to seeds, germplasm, or agricultural technologies, they limit the genetic diversity and scientific exchange needed to respond to climate change, emerging pests, and shifting consumer demands. It slows down breeding programs, stalls research partnerships, and creates silos where knowledge should flow freely. Protectionist policies may seem like a short-term safeguard, but they risk long-term stagnation, especially for countries that rely on shared data, international trials, and global supply chains to feed their populations and build climate-resilient systems.
In agriculture and science, we learned the lesson long ago: science thrives when borders don’t matter. The establishment and success under CGIAR are proof that global collaboration is not just idealistic, it’s essential for the survival of millions of people. Yet we are letting the voices of protectionism hinder our actual national security in global science and the future success of agriculture. We are one planet and we all have some major challenges ahead with climate, food security, and water. We are retreating from acting as one and protecting ourselves and our economies before our neighbours.
Future Hope
As a parent of a young family, I hope this trend changes as I want my children to be part of a global solution, and not one where they benefit merely at the cost of other children’s losses.
