“I just think that this is kind of an industry-wide thing where I think we could work harder at anticipating (problems),” said Cami Ryan, an advocate for awareness of the twin phenomena and their threat to the ag space.

It’s not realistic to expect the flow of false claims masquerading as fact to stop, Ryan said. However, gaining digital literacy, paired with a dose of critical thinking, can go a long way towards being able to identify them.

“I just think that this is kind of an industry-wide thing where I think we could work harder at anticipating (problems),” said Ryan, who holds a day job as social sciences lead for Bayer Global’s North America regulatory science division.

An associate professor with the University of Guelph’s agrees that false claims are a challenge the ag industry can’t afford to ignore.

“I think it’s very important, given that we have really moved to an advanced digitalized world,” said Ataharul Chowdhury of the school’s environmental design and rural development department.

Chowdhury has made misinformation and disinformation in agriculture the subject of his academic research.

“There’s so much information available, but what is right and applicable?” he said. “That’s very difficult to decide, given that so much information is there.”

Misinformed or disinformed?

Although often used interchangeably, misinformation and disinformation have separate definitions, with shades of grey in between, said Ryan. The fundamental difference is intent.

“Misinformation is information that is shared through neglect, through unconscious bias, not knowing that it’s incorrect or inaccurate,” she said.

Disinformation is intentionally deceptive messaging from which the source stands to benefit.

“Disinformation is a product with a market — that’s kind of how I look at it,” said Ryan.

“People are making money or getting value from disinformation,” she added. “That’s 100 per cent how it is.”

Mis- and disinformation are often intertwined in complex ways, said Ryan, who previously served as social and behavioural sciences lead at Bayer CropScience’s St. Louis, Missouri, location.

“Misinformation can be used as disinformation to intentionally misinform and sometimes — from a misinformation standpoint — someone might share disinformation without understanding or knowing that it’s inaccurate.”

Consumers themselves can play a large role in the misinformation industry — either in real life or over social media, she noted:

“At the end of the day, I think sometimes the misinformation piece becomes the consumer in the middle that doesn’t necessarily understand all these things, but is very drawn into the sensationalist stories that the disinformation campaign can share. And they can do that, right? They don’t have to back up their information.”

Disinformation is often embedded in ideology, be it political or cultural, noted Chowdhury.

Undermining of science

There’s another complication indirectly feeding into how prone people are to take the bait on mis- and disinformation, the Ontario researcher argued.

People don’t have the same trust in sources like researchers, voices that in past decades might have been considered authority figures on a subject.

Part of that may be the sheer difficulty in determining what is real as artificial intelligence improves. Warnings of AI-generated, low-quality, but real-looking research papers have emerged from the scientific community in recent years.

Chowdhury, though, also connects the public’s degrading trust to growing corporate oversight of scientific research, which he says comes at the expense of publicly funded work.

Agriculture research has become increasingly privatized and aimed towards corporate goals, he said, moving away from government and farm industry-driven efforts.

“So as a researcher, you get funding from a company and the company definitely has a vested interest. It is not rocket science to understand (the issue), whatever the ethics you follow,” he said.

All of this has led to a world where expertise is often mistrusted while unaccountable media influencers are increasingly looked to for answers, Ryan argued.

‘Attention economy’

Ryan also pointed to “the attention economy” — the competition and monetitization of attracting eyes, of views, of claiming consumer time.

“Agriculture becomes very easy to problematize, so the disinformation vendors or actors can derive value,” she said.

“They don’t care about public health; they don’t care about the environment; they don’t care about anything other than keeping that machinery of disinformation going. So they will feed that machinery with whatever is easy to access and easy to problematize.”

Reliable sources and technology

Although Ryan believes farmers are less likely to fall victim — They’re generally pragmatic, she notes. They have to be to keep their business decisions practical but adaptable — they also exist in the same world, and the same digital spaces, as everyone else exposed to mis- and disinformation.

They’re consumers of everything from food to expensive farm machinery, and therefore, targets.

There is probably no single playbook anyone can follow to avoid being fooled, says Chowdhury, but one multi-tiered strategy encompassing media and digital literacy can help. He calls it critical digital literacy.

“Media literacy is about how media works and how you have to access or understand the media,” he said.

“Digital literacy comes with use of different digital technologies … Especially these days, with the AI era, we have to understand what we see in the digital space and how we can critically think about that to understand what is applicable in real life.”

Consumers can also help reduce the spread of false or misleading information by self-regulating what they share or engage with, said Ryan, using herself in an object lesson:

“Cami goes on to Twitter (X) and sees something that (makes me say) ‘Wow — I need to weigh in on this.’ Do you really, Cami? Do you have to?

“These are things that I think are part of the process of building a relationship with an information ecosystem that we use all the time but we don’t really know and understand. And I think setting those boundaries becomes the most important (part) of critical thinking.”

Producers should seek farming advice from established experts, says Chowdhury.

Farmers often reach out to fellow farmers. He doesn’t discount that kind of peer-to-peer information sharing. Farmers are the ones putting academic concepts into practice in the real world, after all.

At the same time though, he cautioned that mis- and disinformation can piggyback through those peer networks, just as they do via peer networks on social media.

Professional advisors are there to provide that kind of expert advice, he said, but noted that the extension and advisory spaces in agriculture are shrinking and becoming privatized.

“In our research, we found that farmers and other professionals and stakeholders in agriculture still consider that there should be some public support for minimizing controversial issues or minimizing false news,” he said.

When making operational decisions such as a high-investment practice change, Chowdhury advises growers to turn to multiple scientific sources rather than base their strategies on a single academic paper.

Somewhat ironically — given the amount of false claims it’s capable of circulating — he also recommends artificial intelligence as a key tool in the fight against mis- and disinformation.

“There are so many AI tools which can also help detect misinformation, although AI could be also a source of misinformation,” he says.

Ryan, meanwhile believes AI is likely going to make the fight against false claims more complicated, although she also says the ag industry needs to embrace it for its own purposes.

“It’s a great tool we can use many different ways that can benefit us socially and economically,” she said.

“But I think these are the things that we really have to stay attuned to in our industry (by) at least paying attention to what’s going on out there and moving away from a place where we just sort of think it’s going to go away. It’s not going to go away. This is a part of our our world now. It’s a part of the information ecosystem and we have to learn to understand it and try to find ways to mitigate and manage it.”

The post Digital age farmers need truth sleuth mindset appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The Joe and Laverna Hranac family estate recently donated $2.8 million to the post-secondary school, the second largest single donation in the institution’s history.

The announcement was celebrated at a field day at the school’s 385-acre research facility.

“This legacy gift from Joe and Laverna Hranac ensures our students and researchers can continue to work alongside industry partners to solve real-world agricultural challenges,” Brad Donaldson, president and chief executive officer of Lethbridge Polytechnic, said at the event.

“It’s a lasting investment in education, innovation and the agricultural community that helped shape the Hranacs’s lives.”

The gift will support operations at the school’s Research Farm, enabling the continuation and expansion of applied agriculture research and innovation. It also enhances the polytechnic’s capacity for student-focused, industry-connected agricultural research.

Lethbridge Polytechnic has been conducting applied research in agriculture for more than 30 years, most recently within the Centre for Applied Research, Innovation and Entrepreneurship. The centre has managed operations on the research farm since 2020 as part of a lease agreement with the Alberta government.

“The Hranac family’s gift, to support the research farm, strengthens our ability to respond to emerging challenges in southern Alberta’s agriculture and agri-food sector, specifically in the areas of integrated food production systems, irrigation science and post-harvest technology,” said Andrew Dunlop, associate vice-president of research.

“Their generosity also supports the polytechnic’s commitment to hands-on, applied learning that is deeply connected to industry.”

Born and raised in southern Alberta, Joe and Laverna Hranac were lifelong sugar beet, grain and canola producers who farmed land south of Chin and Cranford. Joe passed away in 2008 and Laverna in 2022.

The Hranacs were closely connected to their extended family who say their gift to Lethbridge Polytechnic was inspired by a shared belief in the power of education and a desire to invest in students and agriculture for generations to come.

“Joe and Laverna’s roots were based in farming, and along with that they carried a love of education and family throughout their lives,” said their niece, Cindy Powell.

“They believed in working hard, helping others and creating opportunities for the next generation. This gift reflects their vision of what’s possible and the kindness they shared with everyone around them.”

The post Lethbridge Polytechnic receives major donation appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“There are two areas where we’re falling down,” Saskatchewan deputy agriculture minister Bill Greuel said during an agriculture research panel discussion held Tuesday in Saskatoon as part of Crop Production Week 2025.

“One is front-end basic research and science, and the other is downstream commercialization and collaboration between governments and industry to bring those inventions to market.”

Greuel says the Saskatchewan government invests $37 million a year in ag research, a number that has increased over the last two decades, but he would like to see increasing investments from the federal government as well.

“If you look at everything that’s happening globally, from a trade perspective, a climate change perspective, a growth and population perspective, we’ve got all of this land here in Canada that we better be utilizing as an asset.”

However, increasing funding won’t address all the challenges facing the research community, said Angela Bedard-Haughn, dean of the College of Agriculture and Bioresources at the University of Saskatchewan.

“It’s not just a matter of money,” she said, emphasizing the need to support all stages of research and development, including innovation through to commercialization.

“There’s almost a bit of a culture shift that needs to accompany that.”

Saskatchewan is uniquely well positioned to innovate when it comes to ag research, said Steve Webb, executive director of the Global Institute for Food Security at the U of S.

“We have all the industry players here, we have a growing investment piece, and we have connectivity with the farmers, the grower groups,” he said.

“It’s one of a kind in the world.”

Because of this, he believes we should be seeing more market-impact innovation coming from the province.

“We have to be thinking about return on investment, the opportunity for us to get more bang for the buck from a Canadian perspective.”

The productivity problem is complex, panelists agreed, caused and affected by issues such as a lack of funding and access to capital for ag research, lacking infrastructure, public trust issues and Canada’s regulatory environment.

But despite the scope of these challenges, Greuel says that addressing them should be a top priority within the agriculture sector right now.

“The world is getting more competitive. The trade environment is getting more competitive. If our farmers can’t be more competitive on a global scale, we’re going to be in trouble.”

The post Crop Production Show 2025: Ag research sector has productivity problem: panellists appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The research hopes to answer questions such as ‘What are the social barriers to sustainable farming and food?’ and ‘How can the burden and benefits of that transition be shared equitably?’

The federal government pledged the cash March 19 to launch the Common Ground Canada Network. The initiative will be led by Dalhousie University’s Karen Foster, Canada research chair in sustainable rural futures for Atlantic Canada.

“Producers are already taking action to make their operations more sustainable … This knowledge sharing network will help amplify the work already underway and increase adoption of these best practices,” an Agriculture Agri-Food Canada news release read.

The hard science of sustainable agriculture, things like improved agronomic practices, are already the purview of other research organizations and government funding streams. The network, in contrast, has a goal to tackle the topic from the angle of sociology, social anthropology, political sciences, economics, the humanities and other lenses.

Foster, who is a social scientist, gathered a group of other researchers and applied for the funding to start the network

“I think it arises from this recognition that in many cases we know the technology is there … but there are some social barriers in the way to adoption,” Foster said.

There are also social processes through which people are assured “that if we adopt a certain policy in the name of sustainability, it’s actually going to work.”

The network is also concerned with the “just transition” towards sustainable agriculture—how both the burden and benefits of change could be equitably shared.

This could include topics like farmland ownership—as is the case in work done by network members Annette Desmarais, Andre Magnan and others, on land ownership in Saskatchewan. That research indicated that investor-owned farmland had increased 16-fold between 2002 and 2014.

In a March 2023 opinion piece, published in the Manitoba Co-operator, Magnan and Desmarais said that by 2018, investors owned nearly one million acres of Saskatchewan farmland.

“Given that, on average, investors pay more for land compared to other buyers, these deep-pocketed buyers have undoubtedly contributed to the rapid increase of farmland prices,” they said.

Network members have also studied what areas of food and agriculture venture capitalists are most likely to invest in; the growing reliance of even small-scale farms in Nova Scotia on temporary foreign workers and the potential social and environmental effects of local food movements and their attempts to compete with big economic players.

The five-year project’s overall goal is to increase access to and use of the social sciences in the pursuit of sustainable agriculture in Canada.

The network says they will gather researchers and agriculture and food system representatives, such as governments, community organizations and Indigenous groups, to hash out shared goals and form connections between social science researchers and other fields.

Their plan also includes the development of holistic sustainability goals and the direction of resources to where they’re most needed within the network.

Foster said the network already has dozens of academic and community partners across Canada. According to the AAFC news release, these include the Arrell Food Institute, Food Secure Canada, the National Farmers Union, Humane Society International, Farm to Cafeteria Canada and others.

The post Teasing out the social angle of sustainable ag research appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The Chinook Applied Research Association (CARA) in Oyen has bought a plot combine, tractor, pickup truck, GPS unit, cargo trailer and a mower tractor with $267,000 from the Western Grains Research Foundation (WGRF).

This funding is key to CARA’s goal of providing in-depth research for producers in the province’s Special Areas and MD of Acadia, says a CARA crop agronomist.

“A lot of the equipment that we were running was getting to be out of date and worn out so I think it was necessary to get newer research equipment in the area,” wrote Braeden Peers in a news release.

“When farmers are rotating out their equipment every five to 10 years, and CARA isn’t, our data becomes a lot less relevant.”

The new equipment has enhanced the overall efficiency and quality of the association’s small-plot adaptive research trials, wrote Dianne Westerlund, CARA manager and forage agronomist.

The funding has also indirectly allowed CARA to grow its team by 1.5 field technicians and two to three summer technicians.

“The equipment funding also freed up some budget so we have the flexibility to add more technicians and take on more trials,” wrote Westerlund.

The association’s volume of plot work has increased by 25 per cent in the last five years, which Westerlund credits largely to the newer equipment.

CARA was established in 1979 by a group of local producers who felt the information available from agricultural research at the time did not pertain to the semi-arid area of east-central Alberta.

“The Special Areas and MD of Acadia — with approximately five million acres — lie within the semi-arid, brown soil zone of the Palliser Triangle — conditions which were not dealt with by existing research,” wrote Westerlund in a follow-up email.

“Our soils are also marked by areas of salinity and solonetzic qualities which make crop production challenging. Roughly one-third of our area is native range. Soil and water conservation are always a consideration.”

Ultimately, CARA is research by east-central Albertans for east-central Albertans, wrote Westerlund.

“We take varieties and agronomic practices that have been developed in a research situation and evaluate them in the conditions of east-central Alberta, and then adapt the technology so that it adds value to local producers.”

According to Westerlund, CARA was the first broad applied-research association in the province, specializing in crops, forage and conservation (she points out there were already a couple of forage extension-focused producer organizations in the province at the time).

Since its inception 45 years ago, CARA has evolved, expanding from one program co-ordinator leading field trials to the present day when it employs seven full-time staff and eight part-time or seasonal staff.

Its small-plot trials include research in annual crops (including varieties and agronomics), field demos, perennial forages (varieties and agronomics), grazing, conservation initiatives and more.

This is all for the benefit of local producers, wrote Westerlund.

“A big part of what we do involves sharing and delivering information to local producers, using field trials, demonstrations, reports, newsletters, seminars, field days, crop walks, website, etc.”

CARA has also established a soil health initiative that includes the Western Canada Soil Health Lab. Westerlund says it has the capacity to analyze a number of soil health parameters under the guidance of soil scientist Yamily Zavala.

“Yamily and staff have processed over 8,000 samples during the past few years,” she says.

CARA receives core funding from the Province through Results Driven Agriculture Research (RDAR), the Special Areas board and the MD of Acadia 

Project-specific funding comes primarily through government grants or private industry for custom research.Most projects are a partnership with other associations, Ag Canada or industry specialists, colleges, universities, local ag service boards, ag societies, agri-business and others.

The WGRF is a farmer-funded and -directed non-profit organization investing in agricultural research benefiting western Canadian producers. The funding for CARA came from its Accelerating Capacity Initiative, a $32 million fund dedicated to expanding crop research capacity.

The post Funding gets results for east-central Alberta research org appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Nowhere in the western Canadian agriculture scene is this truer than in the canola sector. When one pauses to reflect, one can only marvel at what has happened.

A relatively obscure crop, grown largely as a machine lubricant, was transformed into one of the primary economic engines of the region’s agriculture sector.

Canola is estimated to add about $30 billion annually to Canada’s economy, a figure that’s sure to grow as more domestic processing capacity comes online along with new uses like biodiesel.

Key to this remarkable story is the work of two plant breeders at publicly funded universities: Keith Downey, a scientist from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Research Station on the University of Saskatchewan campus and the late Baldur Stefansson of the University of Manitoba.

They’re both often referred to individually as ‘the father of canola’, but the truth is that working jointly, both contributed to the plant breeding effort that transformed a lubricant into an edible oil.

Their challenge was to create a crop that produced an oil low in potentially harmful erucic acid and glucosinolates. These compounds restricted its use as a food oil and the resulting meal as animal feed.

Erucic acid was shown in laboratory studies to damage the hearts of test animals. It also imparted a bitter taste to the oil that made it unpalatable to some.

The glucosinolates made the meal equally unpalatable and are an “anti-nutritional,” according to available research. They block the uptake of certain nutrients and at high levels can interfere with internal organs such as the liver.

It was clear that changes were needed, and they happened quickly once the problem was first tackled in the early 1960s. By 1974, the project had already borne fruit with the release of the Tower canola variety from the University of Manitoba, which kicked off the industry we know today.

Canadian canola plantings reached just under 6.5 million acres by 1986, 13.2 million acres by 1995, and broke 20 million acres for the first time in 2012. It’s high-water mark, to date, is just over 23 million acres in 2017, according to figures from the Canola Council of Canada.

It’s unlikely that anyone with a cursory understanding of basic economics would seriously deride the investment of a few bucks into research for the canola sector today, but in the early years, it wasn’t a sure bet.

One early canola pioneer — though I hasten to add this is my only source for this tale — once told me a story of an opposition politician who held up a $30,000 study funded by the federal government into “variations in the oil profile of rapeseed” during a Parliamentary committee meeting as a prime example of ludicrous government spending.

No doubt the obscure crop with a funny name was an easy target. But if there’s truth to this rural legend, I’ll only note that a $30 billion industry that cost $30,000 to get up and running would equal an annual ROI of something in the neighbourhood of 99.99999 per cent annually.

For this reason, the recent investment by the federal government of a further $9 million to boost the already prosperous canola sector via a research cluster is likely a good move.

It’s never a good idea to rest on one’s laurels, and exciting new markets like biodiesel seem primed to grow quickly, even as new challenges like clubroot or climate change abound.

However, there’s another old adage that the agriculture sector and national policymakers should keep in mind: the sector can’t afford to put all its eggs in one basket.

Cereals, for example, remain an important part of rotations, but their productivity growth is lagging and investments aren’t being made by the private sector to develop new genetics.

While there’s a similar wheat cluster set to run from 2023 to 2028, this crop could arguably benefit from a bigger boost.

The pulse sector is another one that would benefit from a research boost. It’s also been a historical beneficiary of the research cluster policy and seems ready to kick off a new effort over a similar timeline.

A benefit of the cluster approach to research is the way it integrates both government and industry efforts — especially the research priorities of farmers and their sectoral groups.

But the real danger lurks in the unknown. If the cluster approach existed in the 1960s, it’s not entirely clear whether then-obscure canola would have made the cut.

Is there another crop like canola out there that holds rich potential but is being ignored because it is a small-acre crop with some issues that must be overcome?

– Gord Gilmour is Sr. Editor, News & National Affairs for Glacier FarmMedia.

The post Opinion: Setting research priorities a complex puzzle appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The 330-acre Ontario site is the host of various demonstration research projects and Canada’s Outdoor Farm Show. It was established as the permanent home for the show in 2020.

“The objective is to provide farmers and agricultural professionals with tangible, applicable knowledge for their own operations. This research covers a wide range of agricultural fields, including crop cultivation, livestock management, soil health and sustainable farming practices,” the site’s website states.

Discovery Farm Woodstock and Olds College of Agriculture and Technology announced the addition Aug. 2 in a joint release. It brings the network’s membership up to eight locations across four provinces.

Other members include the farm’s sister site, Discovery Farm Langham near Saskatoon, the University of Saskatchewan’s Livestock and Forage Centre of Excellence (also near Saskatoon), Lakeland College at Vermilion, Alta., and Alberta’s Lethbridge College.

The network expanded into Manitoba earlier this year, with the addition of the Manitoba Beef and Forage Initiatives near Brandon and the Enterprise Machine Intelligence and Learning Initiative near Winnipeg.

The idea, according to the Aug. 2 release, is to create “a network of Smart Farms supporting Canada’s agriculture sector to enhance efficiency, sustainability, and resilience in response to emerging opportunities and challenges in the industry.

“The network fosters collaboration among researchers, producers, industry partners, and other stakeholders nationwide to drive innovative projects that address critical issues in ag tech development and adoption.”

Sites test and validate digital ag innovations with an eye to how breakthroughs could be applied to farm practices or research.

The network’s multiple sites and diverse geographic regions “multiplies the learnings and increases the value of data generated to connect farmers with industry and research partners to find practical solutions to ag challenges,” the joint statement read.

Olds College launched its own Smart Farm in 2018 on 110 acres. The network was launched in 2021.

Joy Agnew, vice-president of research for Olds College, noted the addition expands the network’s reach past the Prairies for the first time.

“Discovery Farm Woodstock brings production practices and soil types more common in Eastern Canada into network research activities, as well as specific expertise in soybeans and corn,” she said. “The network’s continued expansion across different agricultural zones and land bases brings depth to the network’s projects and technology evaluations, which benefit farmers and developers.”

The college also noted the farm’s links to the University of Guelph.

Lynda Tityk, Glacier FarmMedia corporate director of Discovery Farm and events, said they were “thrilled” with the site’s membership and the new range it will bring to the network.

“Working together with members across Canada in the Pan-Canadian Smart Farm Network allows us to transfer knowledge on initiatives that provide information that matters to Ontario farmers and connect the public to Ontario’s robust and evolving agri-food sector,” she said.

The post Discovery Farm Woodstock joins Pan-Canadian Smart Farm Network appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

They study team is “looking for farmers, ranchers, or anyone who works or lives on a farm” to participate, researchers said in a recent notice.

Their study is in the form of a 10- to 15-minute online survey.

Researchers involved in the study say global-level research shows farmers experience high levels of, or elevated risk for, stress, anxiety, depression and/or psychological distress.

Similarly, a national-level survey of 1,132 Canadian farmers found higher levels of stress, anxiety and depression but “lower levels of resilience” compared to the general population.

The sample group for that national survey, however, included just 98 Alberta farmers, or 8.7 per cent of the total sample, while Alberta farmers make up 21.4 per cent of Canada’s farmer population, the researchers said.

The survey would examine what aspects of running a farm are found to be most stressful, how farming stress impacts mental well-being, how farmers cope with stress and whether they experience burnout.

The study is led by Dr. Rebecca Purc-Stephenson, an applied social psychologist and professor at the university’s Augustana campus at Camrose.

The post Survey to look at farm stress from Alberta angle appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The Simpson Centre for Food and Agricultural Policy, a think tank operating out of the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, says its three recently released reports aim at “providing a neutral and evidence-based analysis of each party and their respective election priorities for the future of the ag sector.”

The reports, it said, “are intended to be a tool for agricultural organizations and stakeholders to use as a jumping-off point for discussions in the lead-up to the Alberta elections.”

The second of the three, titled Primary Producers’ Voices on Policy in Alberta, details results from a survey of 297 Alberta farmers and their concerns on the topics of climate, spending, markets/commodities/trade and technology/research.

The demographics of the farmer respondents were broken down into categories of 18-39, 40-60 and 60 and older.

Sixty-one per cent of respondents in the 18-39 group agreed their farm has been positively affected by federal climate change regulations. The two older groups did not view the situation the same way, however, with only 56 and 23 per cent agreeing respectively.

All demographics strongly agreed investment in research for emissions reductions should be a government priority.

The responses related to spending were not as decisive. On the question of whether the Alberta government provides strong incentives for new farmers to begin their careers, 51 and 52 per cent of the 18-39 and 40-60 groups voted they agreed, while only 21 per cent of those over 60 did.

Agreement that the government should prioritize subsidizing agriculture input costs was similarly tepid, ranging from 40 to 60 per cent.

The category of markets and commodities saw more noticeable agreement, however. All demographics generally agreed upon priorities related to the topic, such as opening up in new international trade markets, ensuring fair returns for commodity producers, incentivizing Albertan commodities and investing in new processing facilities.

Likewise, in the category of technology and research, every group agreed Canadian agriculture research has benefited their farms and investment in innovation technology in Alberta should be a high priority.

There was also consensus that the government should have significant involvement in the agriculture sector.

The first report, The Role of Political Parties in Shaping Agriculture Policy, outlines the track records of Alberta’s previous United Conservative Party (UCP) and New Democratic Party (NDP) governments.

According to the report, “the NDP government funded investments in research, food safety and animal health,” whereas “the UCP government has taken a direct-investment approach with Albertan producers and decreased ministry expenses for increased capital spending.”

The report’s conclusion states the NDP has emphasized increased protection for those working on the agriculture sector, and the UCP has focused more on giving control over to agricultural workers to make decisions about their individual daily operations.

It also concludes the NDP has focused more on research and funding the ministry of agriculture, whereas the UCP has prioritized direct investments.

It also notes many similarities between the two parties, however, such as how they have both invested in agribusiness.

The third report, An Overview of Party Visions, was just released Thursday and summarizes what the parties have promised in their platforms.

Among the more significant pledges were the UCP commitment to expand the Feeder Assistance Loan Guarantee from $2 million to $3 million, and the NDP’s promises to “create an Alberta value-added incentive program to help companies access capital,” create a food incentive task force and “increase staff for services and agri-food and value-added approvals.”

More about the surveys, party history and election pledges can be found in the full reports.

— Jonah Grignon reports for Glacier FarmMedia from Ottawa.

The post Pre-election reports analyze Alberta’s ag issues appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The Agriculture Research Innovation Facility is housed in what was called the Farm Stewardship Centre when it was operated by the provincial agriculture ministry. It was acquired by the college in 2022.

It will be home to seven research laboratories and also assist “small- and medium-sized ag-tech and agri-food producers in their efforts to start up and scale up operations and develop new market opportunities,” the college said in a release.

The federal money is coming from Prairies Economic Development Canada – also known as PrairiesCan – a department created last year when it was spun off from Western Economic Diversification Canada.

The $2-million Lethbridge College grant was part of a series of funding announcements totalling $11.2-million that were made when the department’s minister, Dan Vandal, opened PrairieCan’s Lethbridge office. It also has offices in Calgary and Edmonton.

That sum includes $3.5-million for Lethbridge & District Exhibition for “state-of-the-art digitization of the Lethbridge Agri-Food and Trade Centre” and $242,000 to the Alberta Sugar Beet Growers to “evaluate new market opportunities.”

The post Lethbridge College gets $2-million for ag research facility appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.