Many are talking about de-globalization, when an additional 100 million people are predicted to experience starvation or hunger by the end of the year. De-globalization, however, is a dangerous path for the planet. This does not mean, however, that globalization does not need to be reformed. To do this, Canada must become a stronger actor and not act as a mere spectator. It must aim for its full agricultural potential.
Posted at 10:00 a.m.
With the miseries of the world these days, some suggest we need to de-globalize and refocus our energy to make most of the world’s economies food-sovereign, including Canada. But over the years, and especially for Canada, global trade has served the planet well. However, Canada can do better.
First of all, the world still revolves around the United States and China. All other countries adjust, including Canada. In total, 35% of Chinese exports are destined for the United States. China is also the United States’ largest customer. Canada is a very small player despite its enormous potential in agri-food.
But the Ukrainian crisis is hitting the planet hard. About 15% of all calories on earth come from wheat. Corn also covers a lot of calorific ground. With the war in Ukraine and Western sanctions against Russia, our global wheat deficit this year will be a significant challenge as 25% of wheat exports come from this region. We are going to run out of wheat, corn, barley and many other products. By the time we are through 2022, it is likely that over 100 million more people will experience either starvation or acute hunger, something the planet has never seen before. And the World Bank announced this week that the cost of food will be a gigantic challenge for another two years, minimum.
The entire planet operates under a 90 day production cycle. Canada’s contribution obviously comes in the fall, along with the United States and parts of Europe.
Nearly 40% of the US corn crop is used for ethanol, not food. It’s insane. In Canada, it’s about 10%. Even if Mother Nature cooperates this year, unlike last year, our production will not be enough to eliminate the food deficit we face.
Fertilizers and genetic engineering
On the other hand, Canada can act and be part of the solution. Among the challenges we have to face, access to fertilizers is certainly an important one. This is because farmers need fertilizer to produce crops. However, these critical inputs are currently worth an average of nearly US$1,500 per tonne, five times more expensive than a year ago.
This market is controlled by a handful of very greedy multinationals who manage the supply of their products to artificially increase the prices of fertilizers. Some of them are in Canada. This must stop.
We are also paying for years of media bashing of genetic engineering by groups that have used fear to deliver an organic-centric diet to affluent city dwellers. In addition, groups have recklessly lobbied city councils and provincial governments to ban the use of chemicals that makes farming more profitable and efficient. The approval process for new GM crops can take years in many developed countries, including Canada, ensuring product safety. Agriculture is more than ever anchored in a technological approach and the approval process must be simplified.
Canada is one of the largest countries in the world, but with less than 39 million people scattered across the land. De-globalization would essentially mean a reduction in the standard of living for Canadians, since almost 60% of our wealth comes from international trade. Quite simply, trade makes our food more diverse and affordable. But this does not mean that our current approach does not need to be corrected, quite the contrary.
Successful food systems are not immune to destructive forces like climate change and a pandemic. Tyrants like Vladimir Putin can only make things worse. A 2.0 approach will not only require nations to adhere to acceptable humanitarian conduct to participate in an open economy, but nations must also ensure that farmers are not held hostage by the powerful corporations controlling the fertilizer industry.
Canada will have to take steps to make our agriculture more efficient and productive, through a solid food self-sufficiency strategy.
The only province in Canada that has already adopted such a strategy is Quebec. Canada needs a pathway to produce more in an open economy, giving us better access and affordable prices while growing our agriculture through trade in a sustainable way. A comprehensive strategy would include both sustainable water use practices and renewable energy to support our production.
We lack ambition in Canada. If we get it right, in a few decades we could be supplying water-starved California with food, not the other way around. Bold thinking requires bold strategy. Canada can do better, we have so much to offer.