The state of agri-food sustainability in Canada — A webinar replay

The Canadian Agri Food Policy Institute is driving bold policy solutions for resilient Canadian agri food system and building a stronger future for Canadian Agriculture. Visit capi-icpa.com to discover how hello, my. Name is Tyler McCann and I am the Managing Director of the Canadian Agri Food Policy Institute. Before we begin our webinar today, I want to acknowledge that I am participating in this webinar for Ottawa, Ontario, located on the traditional, unceded, unsurrendered territory of the Anishinaabeg Algonquin people. As an organisation, we recognise that there are many steps on the road to reconciliation and it is a journey that we all need to take together. I want to highlight today that the National Index for Agri Food Sustainability recognises that need for steps on the road of reconciliation and it includes indicators on Indigenous employment, promoting Indigenous country foods and Indigenous food food security. Canadian agriculture and food faces big challenges with the potential for very different solutions that lead to very different outcomes for the sector. Dialogue and debate are essential for getting better policy outcomes. Instead of shying away from thoughtful debate, we should embrace it to advance capi's mission of advancing policy solutions. The Ag Policy Exchange webinar series offers a platform for respectful debate and dialogue to explore different perspectives on critical policy issues. This Ag Policy Exchange asks the question, what is the state of agri food sustainability in Canada? If you require simultaneous language interpretation, please click on the wordly link in the chat and select the language of your choice. All of capi's work is made possible thanks to the support of partners who know that agriculture and agri food can do more and that policy plays a critical role in unlocking the sector's potential. Today's webinar was funded by Agriculture and Agri Food Canada under the Sustainable Canadian Agriculture Partnership's Agri Competitiveness Programme. We are also pleased that this webinar is part of our ongoing partnership with Real Agriculture. Working together, we're excited to bring more of those conversations to people working on farms and industry, civil society and government across multiple platforms to contribute to a more competitive, sustainable and resilient agri food sector in Canada. For more information and upcoming content, please visit RealAgriculture.com or CAPI's website. Today's webinar is going to explore the results of the 2025 edition of the National Index on Agri Food Sustainability. We look forward to diving into what does the data tell us, what is the benefits of this approach and how do we take full advantage of the Centre's results and works in the 2025 edition of the Index, there's a link that's been shared in the chat where you can download the 2025 update. Today we'll also discuss Canada's track record, our leadership and progress in building a more sustainable agri food system, from different environmental outcomes and food integrity to economic resilience and food well societal well being. But before we begin the dialogue, we want to hear from you. There's a poll that's going to be shared on the screen that will give you an opportunity to answer the question. What do you think is the state of agri food sustainability in Canada? You think it's declining, steady, improving or uncertain? And so if you take. While you take a minute to fill that in, I want to take some time and tell you about our webinar. Today we're going to start with a conversation between Shaun Haney, founder of Real Agriculture, and Amanda Richardson, the Executive Director of the Centre for Agri Food Benchmarking. And they will set the stage for the panel discussion that follows. That I will moderate. Our four panellists are Dr. Michelle Edwards, the Director of the Agri Food Data Strategy at the University of Guelph Jessica Norup, the Director of Climate Policy and Partnerships at Agriculture and Agri Food Canada, Brittany LaCosse, the manager of stewardship and sustainability at CropLife Canada, and Kevin Elder, the Project Manager of Labour Market Information at Food Processing and Skills Canada. Throughout the webinar, you as the audience can participate by using the Q and A function to submit questions for either Amanda at the beginning or for our panellists at the end. We want to make our webinars as interactive as possible, so please take the opportunity to fill it in and we'll get a first look at the answer around sustainability. Here we'll share the results. So 37% of people said they think sustainability is improving in Canada. 26% said that it's either steady or they're uncertain. And 11%, 10% of the respondents that answered the poll said they think it's declining. Well, to dig into what the statistics actually tell us, I'm going to hand it over now to Shaun Haney and he will carry on the interview with Amanda. Great stuff. Thanks a lot, Tyler. Really do appreciate it. And thanks to everybody for tuning in today for this Real Agriculture and CAPI webinar. Let's bring in my guest. It is Amanda Richardson. As Tyler mentioned, she is executive Director for the Centre for. She is, sorry, the Executive Director at the Centre for the Director for Agri Food Benchmarking. I really stumbled on that. Amanda, I'm so sorry. How are you doing? We're doing great, Shaun, thanks so much. And you know, I hear you stumbling over the name there of the report in the centre and that just says to me maybe a rebrand and a branding exercises in our future. So I'll keep that in mind on the 2026 to do list. Well, great stuff. Okay, so let's get it. This is an important topic. I think that, you know, there's a lot of, there's farmers, there's industry stakeholders, there's, there's companies really throughout the great country of Canada that are really focused on this topic and trying to figure out how to, how to take, you know, to leverage it and how to move it forward and for, for a lot of different reasons. So I guess off the top, 100,000ft, what is the national index on agri food performance? And I guess essentially, why does Canada even need it? So we have an incredible agriculture and food sector in Canada. It's so diverse. We farm in different regions, we farm in different weather conditions, different soil types. We have food processors and manufacturers that make up such an important part of Canada's economy. And for years we've been implementing sustainable practises throughout the agri food system. And yet we're scrutinised for not always contributing positively to that. And it's a challenge to demonstrate progress and to measure sustainability overall. And so that's where the national Index for Agro performance comes in as a credible and practical that we can measure it. And so what is. Accumulates in a report, but what it really is is it is a framework of indicators and metrics that help us measure sustainability that's built by a coalition of over 165 partners from across the agri food sector. So yes, it's a report that comes out, but it's a report that's grounded in unprecedented collaboration and consensus across the sector. Now a lot of times we talk about sustainability. One of the things that comes up a lot is, well, there's regional differences. So why do we need a national index? The national index gives us the opportunity to, to have a starting point and a framework to benchmark against. So it gives us the opportunity to compare apples to apples a little bit more instead of just being able to compare apples to oranges. And what that does further is, you know, when we have consumers who are interested in, in how sustainable our sector is or we have policymakers trying to use this information for policy or you know, those in, in ESG driven markets or investors. If different regions of our country and different subsectors are coming at these, at, at our publics with different messages in different language, they're going to spend more time trying to figure out what it is that we're talking about rather than being able to acknowledge that yes, there are great things going on in our sector and being able to, to pull out the practises and the outcomes that are sustainable. Obviously when we're talking about data and indexes we're trying to, you know, make sure we've got the right data to create information right. And so, and avoiding that garbage in, garbage out sort of scenario. So what is the current state of, of agri food sustainability data in, in Canada right now then? The index helps us to answer that question by mapping out where there's data and you know, where we have gaps. When the pilot of this index was published in 2023, it was published with, with a few indicators, missing metrics and missing data. And the reason for that is because if we had waited until it was perfect, we never would have got to where we are today and we wouldn't have been able to even have this starting point and the momentum that we have. And so by, by publishing the index with the information that we had available, it gave us the framework to start measuring and sorry, start mapping where we have these limitations. And so, so we have a lot of good data. We have robust indicators and robust metrics, particularly in the economic, in our economic sustainability block in the, some of the environmental stuff is really indicators are very strong, others, others less so. But we certainly have areas of improvement within this, within this update. What, what the data is telling us is that our GHG emissions have been relatively flat. Our soil metrics, while not the strongest, not the most robust within the, within the index are, are fairly consistent. Water quality has been strong, but rising water use signals future stress. Our economic indicators have been kind and down. There are some indicators in there that raise some flags for us around long term competitiveness and innovation. Food security has been a red flag within this update. We saw that one in four Canadians experienced food insecurity in 2023. And our social, our social indicators were a little bit up and down where we did have data for that. A lot of times when it comes to sustainability, people argue about the math and some of the extrapolation of some of the factors. For you, what are some of the challenges that we have with sustainability data when it comes to computing some of this index? We have some great data available to us. We have over 30 partners who provide us with data. The majority of that is large federal data sets. But there are many, many challenges. And so some of those would be where some of our data sources come from. One off reports, obviously one off reports are going to get stale over time and we're not able to show the historical trends of that data. Plus it gets stale. And when we can't replace it with updated data, it becomes less meaningful to us. We have data lags within some of the indicators. For example, our wildlife habitat capacity indicator. Right now we're using data from 2015 for that because it hasn't been updated. Even next year we are anticipating being able to update it, but we'll be using data from 2020. So as we're looking at making real time decisions and recommendations moving forward, that becomes a challenge. Data gets archived, it gets discontinued and in some places we just don't have the data to be able to speak to those metrics very well. Pest control product use is an example of that. There are data sources that have been discussed within our coalition, but we haven't been able to come to a consensus on whether or not the data is accurate enough, method, methodologically sound or serves on purpose. Okay, that all makes a lot of sense. Let's talk about some of the, the barriers that exist when it comes to making some of these measurements on sustainability. First and foremost, we can collect data all day long. There is no shortage of data that we could collect in the world. But it's collected in a way that's fragmented. So different regions, different subsectors are all collecting data differently. There's different standards for quality, there's variable standards for the processes in which data can be collected. And then there's the challenge of taking what data is available to us and translating it into something meaningful that is actually going to be understood by the people who need to use it. If we can't understand it, it's not going to be used. And then finally, well, not finally. I could go on on this one for a while, but I'll to keep this answer fairly short. There's a huge burden with reporting and there's lack of incentives for sharing. So that's something that the national index and our partners we can, you know, help to overcome is by is demonstrating the value and the meaning and the impact that this work is going to do. So as we think about the impact that we're going to make and using our res effectively, we're thinking about what ought to be measured. And that becomes one of our most important questions. So Amanda, from, from your perspective, some people, I'm curious what your thoughts are on this because some people may be watching this and they're like, okay, this, this feels like a 2000 discussion. Has, has the world moved on from, from, from this discussion around sustainability and having these kinds of indexes and being incorporated into trade agreements. And we also have the current, you know, economic. For Canada. So is sustainability still a priority for, for, for companies and, and the overall country? Yes, I think it is. Consumers still care about sustainability, industry still cares about sustainability, farmers care about sustainability and, and the government still cares about sustainability as well. I think we've seen a shift in. It can no longer be sustained environmental sustainability at all costs. The economic sustainable, the economic sustainability is an important part of the puzzle as well. And if, if our agri food sector isn't economically sustainable, we're not going to have people to work in it, we're not going to have farmers, we're not going to have retailers, we're not going to have food processors. So I think the lens is shifting in that it needs to be looked at in the bigger picture of, of how do these different pieces fit together and how is it benefiting society as well? The third pillar of sustainability and, you know, fiscal, fiscal pressure can be a catalyst for clarity. It challenges us to be strategic about what matters most, to invest in the right data at the right time for the right purpose. And that's what we're trying to do with the national index. So obviously, you know, policymakers can use an index like this, but how do producers in the agricultural industry leverage it? The sector and producers can leverage it because it creates this framework for benchmarking. So it's a starting point and it's a tool for commodities or for different subsectors or regions to be able to build their sustainability programmes around. And I mean, one just. That's valuable on its own, having that starting point and having that Apples to Apples comparison. I mean, it may not be Granny Smith apples to Granny Smith apples, it may be Granny Smith apples to Macintosh apples, but at least they're all apples. And so having that starting point from there, that dovetails into having that common language and help which goes such a long way, and helping others to understand, you know, what we're doing. And then even the processes and the ways of working that this coalition has implemented give credibility to the framework overall. But they can also help to set the standard for how we collect data throughout the sector. One of the projects that we're working on right now is the data sourcing protocol which outlines best practises for tracking metadata, for rating the data of quality, reading the quality of a data set, understanding if an organisation is collecting data in a way that's going to make them a trusted data provider. And that's something that can be shared, you know, throughout the, throughout the sector. It's being created for the national index, but with the lens that it can be adopted by others as well. Cool. What's next for, for the index and. For the whole centre index 2.0. So as we work on our update coming in the fall of 2026, what we're doing with that update is looking at the structure of all of our indicators. If we're missing indicators, if some have become irrelevant, looking at the different data that we need to look at. For example, one of the conversations that we're having around that is does Regen agriculture need to play a bigger role in, in what we're looking at? You know, we're asking questions like block sustainability, block style, the right structure and the right way to do that. And then we're continuing, you know, on that theme that I've touched on of continuous improvement. We're continuously looking at improving the data that is there within our existing indicators. Our data sourcing protocol is another, another big piece that will be coming and we'll be implementing that into, into our data moving forward. And then overall this, with the centre, we're setting ourselves up for long term success and you know, looking at how we help Canada's agri food system align with global sustainability reporting and keeping pace in this crazy world we live in. Yeah. And how like when I look at stuff like this, there's also like from a data collection standpoint or evaluation, there's also like, there's probably different math being used in different jurisdictions and methodologies in terms of how they interpret some of the information. That adds like a whole, whole level of complexity as we try to compare how Canada is doing versus the UK or Australia, the United States, Brazil, Argentina. Right. That it's, there's just a lot of. This is a very complex analysis that has to happen. Absolutely. And that's kind of what you touched on is what our data sourcing protocol is. You know, one way that we're helping to solve that and to answer that question and just prepare us to be able to then have those national conversations or sorry, international conversations. And it gives us that shared way of, not only a shared way of working, but to show our work what, what does success. To wrap up here before we pass back to Tyler in the panel, what does success look like? So if we, you know, 10 years out, we look back and we're, we're reviewing this, what will success have looked like? What will have happened with this index? What will be happening with this information and where will it lead Canada to. Meaningful progress on sustainability outcomes? So when Tyler pulls up that poll again at, at the same webinar 10 years from now, you know, we'll have lots of, we'll have, I think the majority answer today was most people feel like it is increasing. We'll have more people who, who feel that we've improved our sustainability and you know, we have, have a sector that feels united and being able to tell that Storey. Great stuff. Are you going to stick around for the Q A, the panel at the back end? I will be around at the end of the webinar. Yes. Great stuff. I will be as well. Kate Tyler, gonna pass it back to you for the pan. Great. Thanks so much, Shaun. Thank you to Shaun and Amanda for kicking that off. I should have said probably at the beginning of the webinar for everyone's awareness that the Centre for Agri Food Benchmarking does exist inside of capi. It is a division of ours, but it is operates independently and is backed up by that broad coalition of partners that Amanda talked about. But important that everyone understands the relationships that exist with this. I would now like to go into the panel discussion and I'm going to bring our first panellist in Dr. Michelle Edwards. She is the Director of Agri Food Data Strategy at the University of Guelph and holds a PhD from the partner Department of Animal Biosciences within the Ontario Agriculture College and a Master of Library and Information Science from the University of Western Ontario and brings more than 20 years of experience and leadership and data management and strategy to her post. Michelle, before we get into the questions that are here, I'm curious. You've got animal science and library and information science. How much overlap is there between animal science and library science? You know, the common thread through all of that is data, you know, and I look back at my career, it's always been about the data. Doesn't matter whether it's animals, libraries, plants, whatever the case may be, it's all about that data set. Well, that's a good segue into this discussion. So that data set, I think if you look at the index, we see lots of different data sets and lots of different contexts. What does good data look like from your perspective, especially when we're looking at national level performance measurements. So it's interesting question and I think Amanda and Shaun touched a little bit about it that earlier on as well. It's about understanding what that data is. So for me, when I look at data, it's all about the documentation, how it was collected, who created it, where was it created, what biases there are, what's the definition. So when I think about a really simple example, a weight, you know, how is that weight measured, what are the units measured? Just because I work with it in pounds, does that mean that the data is still collected in pounds? Maybe not thinking about how is it summarised? You know, when we look about some of these national summary tables that we have, you've got averages, how is that, you know, how's that average calculated? Is it calculated across Canada, Is it calculated in certain regions of Canada or is it calculated in individuals? Without having that documentation, without understanding how that was collected, the data is questionable in my mind. You know, when you think about. Amanda used the analogy, and I love the analogy, apples and oranges, oranges and, you know, different varieties of apples. We have to have a really good understanding what that data is, how it was collected, who collected it, what biases are there? I think it's more about good enough. I challenged by that terminology. I'm thinking more about is it appropriate for our use? Is how the data that we're using, that we're going out to find, how it was collected, is it most appropriate for how we want to use it? Not necessarily. Is it good enough? But Sir. Michelle, it often seems like if you think about all of those different dynamics, right, that you outlined, all of the different issues that we grapple with when we think about data, it seems like that's. Those can all be excuses for not putting kind of data together and not trying to look across something as complex and diverse as agri food sustainability, because the data is not all of the same. How do we overcome that dynamic? Well, I think first and foremost is knowing what data is out there. I mean, right now we don't know what we don't know. I mean, there might be some really cool data sets being collected in different regions of Canada, but we don't know that they exist because nobody's sharing that data information. Not sharing the data, sharing the metadata, sharing that documentation of what's being collected. So if I look at projects that I'm currently leading and co leading, such as Agri Food Data Canada and Climate Smart Data Collaboration Centre, what we're doing is asking our researchers, asking our stakeholders to document the data, make that Documentation available. So now I can search across that. So I can see that, you know what, I've got a project in bc, in Nova Scotia, in Ontario and Quebec, looking at several of the same factors. So now I can talk to these individuals and see, hey, can we start that conversation about other opportunities to work together, other opportunities to share the data. But if we don't know what's out there, how do we even start to put the picture together? We have to have that knowledge about what exists first. And so your work talks about an ecosystem of data, Right, which is a similar approach to the National Index. The National Index itself is not kind of the collector of data. I often like to say it's the curator of data. Exactly how close are we to having a good ecosystem of agriculture data in Canada? We're getting really close. The tools that we've built, we've got a number of projects across Canada now that are sharing their metadata, and we're just building on that. So I think we're getting, we're getting really close. We need to continue these collaborations. So, you know, I'm looking to, I would love for, you know, members or to work closely closer with CAPI and the index to bring on these, some of these tools to start sharing, start collaborating, to make these, you know, to build that ecosystem. And the flip side of this is, I mean, you alluded to this earlier, right? But it's about the users of data and making sure that you know what you're looking for. How good of a job do you think we all, as data users think, have and understanding what we're really looking for, for data? And how much of a challenge is that? Yeah, that's a, that's a, that's a big question, isn't it? I think we, in my mind, I always have to come back to what's. What, what do I want? What's my goal, you know, what's my research question? If I think about it in the research side of the world and then looking at, you know, what pieces of information do I need to collect to help me answer that question? It's so easy to get sidetracked by the, the shiny cool stuff like, oh, you know, we've got this really cool data set over here that might help me and I might veer off my question. So I think it's a huge challenge and I think we just need to keep our, you know, keep our head straight and stick back to that original question that we're looking to answer. Right. And it reminds me of a discussion that we had on a webinar about digital agriculture where someone was talking about the amount of data that's collected by a robot in a dairy barn, for example. And, you know, do producers really leverage and use all of the data that's available to them? Right, that, that's the challenge is not only kind of how do we get the data, how do we understand what data is there, but then how do we make sure that we know how to use that data effectively? Exactly. It comes back to that purpose. Why, why the data is being collected automatically. But what do we need from that data to help us, you know, increase our profits, increase our profitability or increase our production? So, yeah, keeping in mind what is our personal goal with the data? Not using the data just because it exists. Right, well, we will get back into that, Michelle, with our other panellists. I'll bring in our second panellist now. And our second panellist is Jessica Norup. Jessica has almost 25 years of public policy experience with the Canadian Federal Government at Agriculture and Agri Food Canada. She's worked in the Business Risk Management Programmes Directorate and then she moved to the to be Director of Climate Policy and Partnerships in the Strategic Policy Branch. She's got a Bachelor of Commerce in Management Economics and a Master of Arts at Economics, both from Guelph. Bit of a Guelph theme here in the webinar today. Jessica, you work for the Federal Government. The Federal Government is one of those users of data. I want to kind of start with kind of a, a simple question around how does measuring and reporting data support Canada's strategic priorities in agriculture? Great, thanks, Tyler. Great to be here. Really appreciate Cappy inviting me. You know, I'll start just by saying these are kind of Jessica's views based on my experience and I have kind of worked on environmental economics across multiple kind of economic sectors. And so, you know, I think a lot of this is very relevant to agriculture and Agri food, but could probably be equally relevant to some of the other sectors. But there are some real uniqueness, unique kind of elements with agriculture that, you know, I've come across. You know, I think there, this is an area that I am in particular very passionate about. I think there's often misunderstandings about there always being trade offs between profitability and environmental action. And I think the key to basically dispelling that myth is through data and evidence. And that is for me the most important thing, both for the government, but then also to kind of unlock the ability for, you know, producers and processors to, you know, almost use their environmental actions. To actually potentially bring in new income, save money and all of those things. It doesn't necessarily need to be something that you know is going to actually it costs them money. And so, you know, I think there are a lot of different opportunities for both kind of for the Federal government to play a bit of a leadership role, but it's got to be with a number of different groups. So, you know, how do we get better organised to move this forward? So, you know, the index is a great step in that direction. But I think this whole concept of diversity, right, and the sector, there's no one size fits all, that also works when it comes to data. And you know, for the federal government, if we're talking about greenhouse gas emissions, for example, we have our National Inventory report. It is often criticised for not kind of taking into consideration farm level practises. And so, you know, a farmer can do something on farm and then how that's not going to be reflected in Canada's official estimates. But that, you know, the, the National Inventory report is done for a certain purpose and that might not be the same tool that should be used for other purposes, including kind of what's being done on farm, but because it's fractured because we're not talking to each other, you know, there no one knows whether you're using the same methodologies and approaches. And so, you know, we need to find a way to kind of get everyone together on the same page and then that can start helping us to look at, you know, even looking at some access to international markets, for example, if we're able to kind of better align and harmonise with, with other mark or like other jurisdictions. But then also, you know, the inset and offset opportunities that there might be those require data and you would hope that in like the, the perfect kind of ideal ecosystem, the data that can be used by, you know, producers or the sector in some other way could also be used by governments to inform policymaking. But then you get into the privacy and data sharing questions which are a whole other topic. Yeah, it's always an interesting challenge whenever producers want governments to make better informed decisions but are very reluctant to give up the data that governments do need to make make those decisions. But just I want to go back a couple of steps. You talked about kind of data and trade offs. One of the things that the index does is it presents economic, environmental, societal well being and food integrity data together kind of in that same framework. And it doesn't necessarily kind of do trade offs against them, but is able to show, look at we are making progress on soil health, but we've got challenges with economic competitiveness. Recognising that, it doesn't mean that there's a link between the two. But what's your view around that holistic view of sustainability and how well we can put economic, social, societal issues together and whether or not the index is kind of a step in that direction? Well, I've always thought that that, well, that is the definition of sustainability, right? That it brings together all of those elements. And I feel like it's almost gotten a bit of a bad rap in recent years as being kind of code word for environment only. And so I think I'd really like to see it come back to its true meaning and having kind of all of those facets. I think the challenge is that how do you, and you know, as an economist, I think of the word index and you know, I think of the consumer price index or some sort of index that would take all of those different pieces together and have like an overall kind of metric. And you know, because there is no clear kind of easily easy indicator for measuring sustainability or what that kind of definition is, I do think being able to at least see those different trade offs and so that, you know, any given person can kind of decide about how they feel about that. But I do like with the index itself because it's so aggregate, you know, how can, sometimes I wonder how producers can use that information to reflect on their own operations. And I think the starting point is to say, you know, hopefully what we can do is get a framework that everybody agrees to. So at least when we're thinking about sustainability, we're thinking about the same different components of it. And I know that as the kind of work moves on to this, the next version of the index, these are some of the things that we'll be looking at. But, but it is certainly, I think easier said than done to, to try and find that approach, that truly holistic approach that looks at all of those different blocks and puts them together again. I think that that's, that's a question that governments struggled with over the last, last while and that we all struggle with too. But hopefully like you say, we don't lose sight of that kind of dynamic around kind of a sustainability for looking at it the way the index does. That this is all together is, is a good thing. I am noticing people moving to the term resilience instead of sustainability and I'm not sure if that's really tackling the big issue because I think they are different concepts and so, you know, I think. Yeah, and I. I always think resilience is a funny word because it used to be we talked about growth and resilience is not growth. Resilience is kind of recovery after a disaster. But if all we're ever planning for is recovery after the disaster, I'm not sure that that's really what we want either at the end of the day. And maybe, maybe on that note, we will bring the next. We'll not put you on the spot for that one just right yet, but we'll bring our next panellist in, and that is Brittany Lacosse. Brittany is the Manager of Stewardship and Sustainability at CropLife Canada, a national association representing Canada's innovative solutions oriented plant science industry. There, Brittany collaborates with a wide range of ag stakeholders to promote domestic and international recognition of plant science as a key driver of sustainable outcomes. She also went to Guelph and got her Bachelor of Science there and has a Master's and Science and Sustainability Management from the University of Toronto. So, Brittany, let's start with a question. So when you look at the work that you do every day, crop life, understanding that role that crop protection and plant breeding innovations play for sustainability and helping people to understand that is important. The index looks at how much Canada is using these tools. I'm curious, how does the Index help communicate kind of how the sustainability works and how does it play into the work that you do every day? Yeah. So thanks for the question, thanks for the opportunity to participate on this panel. Just maybe a bit of background on Cropley for those who might not be as familiar with what we do. So we're a national trade association representing the manufacturers, developers and distributors of pesticides and plant breeding innovations. So these products that our members provide, both in agricultural and urban settings, from synthetic, organic, biologicals, diversity of plant breeding innovations really help farmers when they're faced with a challenge. Whether it's biotic or abiotic, these innovative solutions are enhancing productivity and sustainability on the Canadian farms. So while, yes, generally these innovations may not be immediately recognised for their sustainability outcomes, but we have to continue telling that storey and as we have access to more data and new methodologies to ensure we're giving the best science out there and how these tools give positive outcomes in the sustainability space, like soil health and greenhouse gas emissions, food security, we have to work hard to tell this storey and we do that ourselves. Shameless plug here for our Grow Canada Strong initiative. But to answer the question about how the index can help communicate these contributions both domestically and internationally, it's really that the index is focusing on having that high quality data, they're doing the data rigour while also having a coalition of partners for collaboration and really building that trust. The index really focusing on high quality data and having these discussions and going through their project of the data sourcing protocol really helps build that reputation of trust and transparency, which helps with but these innovations that sometimes get a bit of a bad rap. So by having this high quality data is really important in telling our storey. It's also really nice that the coalition of partners allows it to kind of be a sounding board for, you know, what data makes the most sense for these indicators and ensuring that we get the answer right. Amanda mentioned it in her opening remarks that were in discussions about a metric for the responsible pest control use. And that's because we want to make sure we get this right and we're telling the storey of the contributions of these tools and we're not just trying to put data to have data there to say, you know what, we've got measurement here. And the important part is that we're being thoughtful and we have really good data to tell this really important storey. And I really am looking forward to the next year really diving into this and working with different associations who are partners in the index who maybe wouldn't have crossed paths with before, but to really make sure that we're telling the sustainability storey of not only these innovations but Canadian agriculture as a whole. So Brittany, you touched on this, but I think if you look at crop production products, they're probably one of the best examples of kind of data that needs to be fit for purpose and you need to understand the context and the limitations of the data that's there. And the update talks about how, you know, we don't have good metrics on pest control product use intensity in Canada. Talks about kind of the, you know, when you've got either practise based data point or a hazard based data point, it doesn't actually reflect the risk of using these products. Not all of these things are created equal. How much of a challenge is not having a good metric to use? How much of an impact does that have in the work that you do? Well, I'm never bored, I'll say in work, always, always trying to answer this discussion. And I think too it's important to note that it's not only the index that's looking at answering this question, but even internationally we're seeing this discussion go on with the biodiversity convention as well and they're taking their time to make sure that the data and the metric that's selected for this is fit for purpose. That kind of goes to what Michelle was talking about is what purpose does this data have? And you know, I think that's also why it's so important for the indicator itself to have the right language and ensuring that we're all using the same language when talking about the indicator and the data that we do ultimately land on to demonstrate those sustainable outcomes. And you talked about that kind of international piece there. Again, I'm curious as to how you think how we're approaching this in Canada compares to other parts of the world. Are we ahead or behind? Are there things that we should be learning from other international efforts on this? I would say we're comparable to other markets Biassed, I guess I would say that I always see Canada as a leader in the sustainable ag space and we're really good at collaboration and I think the index has really re emphasised and in all sustainability discussions that I'm involved in, it's how do we break down those silos and collaborate together to ensure that we're all working towards that same outcome? So I think Canada takes lessons learned all the time from, from similar areas and we, we all want to work together and ensure that we're, we're coming to the, to the right conclusions. And do you think having good data makes it easier to work together? I think so and it can help by sharing lessons learned in the data space as well. So the, the index in Canada being one of the first countries to do this, I think allows us to take on more of a leadership role in this space and be able to share our lessons learned as well. Great. Well, thank you, Brittany. We will give you a break. We'll bring our last panellist in and then get into the group discussion after our last panellist is Kevin. Kevin Elder is. Grew up in Alberta, California, lived around the globe, now makes his home in Ottawa. He joined Food Processing, Food Processing Skills Canada in 2017 and has been leading the organisation's labour market information insights since then. Now, Kevin, you also do some policy government relations work, if I have that right. And so what I would like to start with is, you know, where does labour force capability fit into broader sustainability goals? And if I could build on that in saying how are we doing when it comes to data around labour in agriculture? So I'll start with the second part first. I'd say the data piece is difficult to manage because nationally we can get really good information about who's working in the sector and where they come from and how much they make and these sort of broad things. But when you try to break it down into what Shaun alluded to at the beginning with some of the regional differences, we just don't have the numbers. And so you end up going, oh, I'm curious about how many people work in the beverage sector in Prince Edward Island. You can't find out. That information gets suppressed because there just aren't enough people there. And so trying to look at some of the regional differences is a challenge. And that's sort of a weak spot in the data. And part of that's just Canada's population, but there's other aspects to that. But for your first question, I think the labour force is critical to the discussion on sustainability. They're the people that are going to carry out the work. And one of the things that we've done at FPSC was some perceptions research on just the general public. And we found that among young millennials in Generation Z, so when we did the survey, it was people under 30, so now sort of under 32, it was 70% of people in that under 30 category wanted to work somewhere where their employer was aware and trying to deal with aspects of societal or environmental challenges facing the world. So they're not expecting a packaging company or a dairy processor to solve climate change, but they want them to say, what are we doing as a company? And then we found as well that when those companies are invested in tackling that and upfront, people want to stay, they want to be part of those companies. Apologies, there's doing some construction work in the hotel. Right. But retention is a huge issue for the sector. We don't have enough people and we're much more labour intensive than other manufacturing sectors. And so that doesn't mean that there's not space for new tools and innovations like digital twinning or things like that that can help people find efficiency. But we're really trying, like, we struggle to get the word out about just how many people are needed. And especially in rural communities where we're the main employer, the population drained to urban centres is creating a problem. And so I think broadly that we have all the pieces in place to really launch ourselves to be a leader in sustainability, as Brittany mentioned. But I think we need to make sure that we have all the supports in place and right now they're tenuous. And so it's interesting, Kevin, because I think food processing labour is probably a great example of a space where just because you have the data doesn't mean you're going to get those supports. Right. We know the statistics show us that food manufacturing is the largest manufacturing sector in the country, employees more than anyone else. But yet that doesn't mean that governments seem to understand or appreciate that nuance. How do you kind of deal with that dynamic between. It's one thing to have the data to understand what the data tells us and it's another thing to be able to convince others of what the data actually tells us. Us at the end of the day. Yeah, I think it's just trying to find ways to frame it for people. Like when we talk about it being the largest manufacturing employer, one in five manufacturing jobs are in food and beverage manufacturing. But as I mentioned, we know it's more labour intensive and okay, that's more people, but it's also the largest manufacturing sector by GDP as well. And one of the ways I've tried to frame it is even if you look at Ontario where the auto sector is massive, it's a huge industry in the province. Food and beverage manufacturing within Ontario is bigger than auto manufacturing in Ontario. And so it's having a huge impact. But it's really, there's trying to find those ways to connect people with it. But part of the challenge is the sector is really unbalanced. And so for example, in the country right now there's almost 9,000 food and beverage manufacturing establishments, but there's only 84 of them that are considered large employers. And so when you're looking at who's leading in innovation, automation and those R and D investments typically around the world, around the globe, anywhere you look, it's large employers that have more than 500 employees at a location. And that's less than 1% of the Canadian food and beverage manufacturing industry. And so Michael Graydon has spoken about this as well. There's a real problem of getting that level of automation into smaller manufacturers and creating the ecosystem to, to really help everybody take a step forward. And where we've seen it struggle with statistics is when you take all of these employers, like I'll use an example that people are probably familiar with around beer. If you're looking at like Molson or Moosehead or some of these large breweries like that, and then thinking about how many craft breweries there are that employ five people or six people, the amount when you're looking at productivity, you're not going to be saying we're maximising our beer process and labour. Sorry, they're right above right now. That's okay. I have a particular follow up that again, I Don't want to put you on the spot about numbers, but one of the indicators that's used is the wages paid in the food manufacturing sector. And if you look at it reports on data from 2016 to 2024 and it's, it looks like it's been a fairly significant growth. I'm just curious as to how when we look at kind of this mix of indicators that are here, Kevin, how do you kind of think about the storey that all of this tells? Because it looks like we're seeing wage growth in the sector. You talked about some of the challenges though, attracting people into it. How do we kind of piece all of this together looking at all of these different data points? I think it's using this storey to parse out the regional differences. One of the challenges with, with, with Canada is that we have vastly different minimum wages across the country. And one of the things that we found in a survey was that typically employers are paying over $3, $3.25 over minimum wage for a starting employee based on their province, province's minimum wage. And so I think part of that is telling the storey of how much money you can make. But I often tell employers that because we're such a rural based industry, if you're looking to attract people to work in the sector, tell them about the opportunities that exist in housing in a rural community. It's something like myself, I grew up in Calgary. I couldn't have told you a house price or rent price anywhere outside of Calgary. Even within my own province. I had no concept of what that is. And I think that's the same for a lot of young people today that they are aware of what rent costs in their own city. But if you're saying, you know, oh, should I take this job that pays, you know, $28 an hour in Brampton, or should I take this job that pays $26 an hour in Trois Riviere? People would go, okay, well I'm going to make more money in Brampton. That's where I want to be. But the rent in Trois is significantly lower and you'll probably make $10,000 more dollars in Quebec than you would in Ontario. And so looking at those sort of things and trying to help get the message out to really about the quality of life that people can have in, in rural communities no matter what sector they're in. And I think part of that is getting the rural, the chambers of commerce and the business community on board. Because if you can get more people working in these communities, it supports all the people that Are there. Thank you. So with that, Kevin, we'll bring Brittany, Jessica and Michelle back into the discussion and maybe we'll, we'll open up the group discussion with you though, Kevin, while the others come in. If you go back to that poll question that we asked the group earlier, do you, Kevin, how do you answer the question around whether or not you think that the Canadian agro food system is seen as sustainable or not? I think I like that there was an answer there that was uncertain and I think that was reflected in how varied the answers were that came in because the way that I would describe it is we're at a crossroads. I think that we're already viewed as really sustainable country in a lot of aspects of the food ecosystem. Oh, the agriculture and food ecosystem because there's non food agriculture as well. But I think we have that global reputation and I think we can build on that. But part of that takes investment in getting all the pieces in to make sure that we're measuring the right things, that if we need people in these areas, that we're finding ways to support people going into these careers and incentivizing where we want to see that those investments made. And so for me, I would have answered uncertain in the poll because the opportunity is there for us to continue growing. But I wouldn't really say that we're steady either because there's all these pressures, whether they're domestic pressures or international pressures like we've seen with tariffs from the US and China on Canadian food products that are pulling at, at our foundation that we've built in sustainability. So I hope that we can keep improving and take steps forward. I think we're at a good, a good place, but I'm not, I don't have 100% confidence that we're going to maintain where we are. I would love us too, and I'm working to help us do that, but I'm not, I would say uncertain. So Jessica, I'm going to, I will say proactively for you that we're not asking you to deliver an official government of Canada position. So how do you answer that question about how you see the sustainability system? So, you know, in preparing for kind of this event, I was thinking about that question and I mean the answer for me is, and this is actually the problem is I don't know. And you know, because this sector is so multifaceted and so to really get a good comprehensive picture of that, there's no one indicator, right. And so it really needs to be a collection of indicators and Then, you know, we talked about before those trade offs, right? And so, you know, I, I do find that people can pick and choose, they can pick and choose reputable data that's going to, you know, support their argument. And that's kind of the world we're in now. Which is another kind of concern is making sure that we have something that is, you know, robust enough that it can kind of stand up because, and because we, you know, don't have anything that people go to right now. And I think, you know, that's maybe where the index is trying to kind of position itself is to be able to say, is Canada sustainable? Right. In terms of our food production? And you know, I think there's a lot of work that's been done, but I think, you know, we still need to work more together because there's a lot of different groups popping up trying to do similar things and when it's not coordinated, there's a lot of risks associated with that. And we want to make sure that something that's developed is credible. I think that's a really interesting point, Jess, because I mean, one of the things that makes the index unique is that it's got 160 partners that are behind it. There is that effort to try and bring people together. But Brittany, maybe go to you to kind of build on this question around sustainability because again, if you think about sustainable use of pesticides, for example, that really should be seen, I think in a broader context around land use and productivity and all of these other different indicators too. How do you think about kind of the answer to the question around are we sustainable? Is the system sustainable or not? And how do you think about all of those different data points and they play into your thinking on that? Yeah, I thought we were going to be fairly biassed in our responses in saying that. Is it seen as sustainable within the industry? Yes, I think so. Maybe outside the industry, maybe, maybe not. So I was surprised with some of the uncertainty, but I think that with the index this gives us an opportunity to communicate where we are today in our sustainability journey. I always like to asterisk that sustainability is not an endpoint, it's meant to continuously evolve and make you question, is this the most efficient way to do X, Y and Z? Are we having unintended consequences of our activities today? So I like to say that along our journey we're doing quite well in the AG space and the index allows us to communicate that by showing where we are today. There's some past data points as well and this Allows us to kind of cheque in with ourselves of where are we doing really well, where can we improve, what are our overestimates or what do we need to relook at now that technology has improved or innovation has improved? So I think, I think, yes, we're sustainable, but we're continuing on this journey. We need to continue to question things and look at things and look at where we can increase our productivity and our efficiency within the agri food system. Michelle, I'll give you an opportunity to answer that question about sustainability as well. But I'm curious from a data perspective, Brittany talked about it being a journey. One of the challenges is, you know, when data continues to evolve and change over the journey, it can be hard to kind of understand what progress looks like as new data becomes available and kind of your measurements change. How. So part A is how are we on the sustainability piece? And part B is, and what do we do on that journey when the data keeps changing and how do we compare that progress over time? Yeah, so I'm going to be the uncertain piece or the uncertain answer because I'm not sure where, where things are at in, in the bigger picture, whatnot, because of the data side of things. You know, I think the one piece that's missing out of all this, all of these discussions, is we have to have an investment in the data side of it. Right now everybody's collecting data, but they're collecting data with their own purpose. Maybe they're collecting it for that one off. You know, like somebody said that one off report and then the data is put to the side and left there and it's like, okay, if there's some interest, somebody will come along and say, oh, remember that report that we did 10 years ago? We should update it. There has to be a concerted effort, has to be a concerted investment in the data side of all of this. So what do I mean by that? So, you know, money's towards helping to train people to collect the data, document the data, store the data, make it accessible. And I think that has to come across all the whole sector, not just individual pieces, not just the research side, not just. I'm going to pick on you, Jessica. Not just on, you know, at AFC or not in the government. It has to come across everywhere. And I think that will help us also. That second question that you asked Tyler, in the changes in the data right now, it's difficult. What do we do when data changes or how it's being collected, if we don't have that concerted effort. We don't have that investment in, you know, the collection and the processing and the storage of that data. If we're able to do that, I think we're going to be better off in the future. Can I just jump one thing on that? Because, like, I think, you know, in the government, we always look to Statistics Canada for their data and I'm not sure they're particularly agile, nimble and kind of getting data out quickly. And there are all of these other sources, but do they follow, you know, all of the, the same kind of robustness? But we need to have that discussion because we do risk a lot of duplication or not, you know, doing the things that our different organisations are good at. So kind of trying to be more complementary. Absolutely. You know, one of the challenges that I see when we have these conversations is everybody's trying to reinvent the wheel. Can we stop? Let's, let's sit down in the room together and have these collaborative conversations. I think there's so much, so much that we could do together. So. Yes, absolutely, go ahead, Kevin. Yeah, just through the work on the index, the Canadian Standards association is working on technical specifications to sort of outline how we track metadata and all of the different pieces that go into that so that hopefully when we get Those published in 2026, that people will be able to see everything that people are collecting and so that groups that aren't part of StatsCan and haven't had all of those sort of pieces are able to provide all that information so that anyone can pick up the data set and go, okay, I know what this covers and what this doesn't cover and what the caveats are in all these pieces and then figure out and make better use of the data and look at what, like as Michelle's example of I'm measuring this in pounds, is somebody else measuring in kilogrammes and sort of standardise the information that we're getting to have more apples to apples comparison. So hopefully that that tool will help enable those discussions next year. Is there not also an issue, though, of sometimes we let perfect be the enemy of the good when it comes to data and measurement. And Jessica, maybe I'll pick on you again because a colleague of yours reached out this morning with questions about data and some data work that they're doing where Agriculture Canada is trying to compile new data and indicators on the topic. And kind of my first reaction when I looked at it is like, there's, there's all of this data that's already out there and it seems like, again, we're going to kind of take another crack at coming up with a better set of indicators on it. How do we avoid that temptation to always think, well, this data may not be perfect, so we're going to go out and create something new rather than understanding the limitations that exist and how we can make it work. I think we need to have some more mechanisms for dialogue across the different, you know, sectors of the ecosystem. Make sure that we're all talking to each other because this is, you know, one thing I've found is having conversations about all these different data collection efforts and the number of times I've seen duplication within the government, likely doing it not as well and probably more expensive. And so like, I think, you know, we need to find more mechanisms now for that collaboration, a bit more of a kind of dedicated discussion. I do think the Index is a potentially a good place to start and how do you take that and build it out and kind of, you know, and I know there have been, you know, recently AFC has kind of gotten more involved with the index through, you know, the programming. And so how can we kind of build on that? I think is, you know, one thing that I think about. And so, Brittany, I want to shift a little bit to talk about what are the other questions that's come in and the question talks about, you know, the index itself measures the indicators, kind of presents this picture of what the data is, but it doesn't nudge the sector towards becoming more sustainable itself directly. What's your perspective on the role that the data and the indicators play in pushing the sector forward on that sustainability journey? And what role does that transparency play in improving sustainability of comes at the end of the day? Yes, I don't necessarily think that it's the Index's role to change what, what egg is doing, but that could be an outcome of the index. By having these discussions in these forums and folks sharing what they're doing could encourage or nudge different associations or sectors to look at what they're doing in a reflection of discussions at the index and start to consider what can they do to, to move on sustainability. And what Jessica had said earlier about the environmental being such a big focus lately. I hope that because the Index looks at the sustainability picture, it could be that different sectors look at how can they improve their efficiency for productivity or profitability rather than feeling this immense pressure to find a solution in the environment bucket they can really focus on or their social well being in their sector, whether it's on the farm or their employees. That these discussions can start to generate new ideas for nudging in some sort of sustainability direction, but not necessarily pigeonholing agriculture, to only look at environment, to really look at this as a holistic picture and asking, what can we do? Where can we improve? And I think there's like a, is like, I think of whether there's the potential at some point in the future to have some sort of benchmarking ability with the index. Like, it's like, could you have a tool where a producer is able to kind of, you know, not necessarily share their data, but at least input their data and compare it to something so that, you know, the, the index can be brought down a little bit more to kind of something that's useful for producers. Because I'm not sure, you know, and I do think that there are, there are certainly a lot of advisors and stuff out there that can support them with tools and that kind of thing. But, you know, I, I do think by bringing them more accessible data that's going to help them make decisions that, that, you know, can save them money or, or whatnot. Yeah, I agree with that. I think it's having the index just exist, provides people that are looking for information, a source to find out what other people are doing and what, what other people, even other parts of the sector are measuring, to look at some of the detail that people are going into and, and often having access to that then enables more sharing and creates that environment. Did a focus group once and we were asking people to just tell us what they were paying a frontline worker. And two people at the start didn't say anything. And then we had some union employers where it was already public and it went around. And by the time we got through everyone else, those two people shared the information that they hadn't shared before because they'd heard everybody else's information and then knew what they, where they, where they fit in, what was going on. And so I think that's the role the index plays. I don't think it's, I don't think we really need to get to a point where the index is nudging. But the businesses will nudge themselves based on saying, how do I address this challenge? Or what can I do? And so if somebody says, oh, improve your environmental efficiency or save your power costs, it'll save you money. They'll look, how do I do that? What are people measuring? And they'll look in the index to figure out what they could be looking at. Like all those tools are there and it's up to employers on how they use them. I think it also helps. It'll also help people to see what kind of impact the index or how the tool they're using has on themselves. Does that make that. Say that Proper English there. But I think that's. It's all about the storeys, like you say, the influence and the impact on them, on the individuals as well. And so I want to pivot again. We've got a couple of different questions that have come in on the theme of productivity. And like productivity is a news that's. Or a word that's been in the news a lot lately. Lots of talk about the challenges that we've got. But also, you know, I think it's a, a word that. Or in theory a measurement that can mean a lot of different things depending on how you're using it. In agriculture for primary production, we often talk about total factor productivity, but when you look beyond the farm gate, often we're talking about labour productivity is the measure that we use. Those are not the same thing and we just different results at the end of the day. But you know, some, some of the questions come through around understanding the differences and variability from kind of small and, and big. Kevin, there's a. One of the questions builds on something you said earlier, talks about kind of the tension between kind of more productive, bigger operations and potentially less productive, smaller operations that may employ more people or may have more of that local, local scale. One of the questions is around, you know, comparing apples to apples when we're talking in the productivity context. Productivity is a word that comes up in, in the index report quite a lot. But I guess I'd like to go around the webinar and say kind of what are your perspectives on the role that productivity as a, as a concept plays in this kind of sustainability discussion and whether or not we've got the right things to look at it. Jess, do you want to go first on that? That's a good question. And you know, I like. It's interesting because I feel like sometimes we find different words to kind of say similar type things. Like, you know, and I find that what I like to do is to try to think about, okay, like what is. What are we actually trying to kind of get out of this metric, right? And okay, if what for what that outcome is, is, well, how is the simplest way we can actually kind of communicate this, right? And I think you get into things like total factor productivity and it starts getting into some pretty complex, you know, equations. So even if someone were to say See a trend or whatnot, do they really know what that means? And so I think that's part of it is that we want concepts that are understandable to the audience that we're aiming for. Right. So I think part of it is finding out we've got the, you know, technical definition of productivity, but what does that mean to people? And then going back to, okay, well then if it means this, then maybe these are some ways that we could measure it and do it that way. I mean, that's kind of a little bit less of a, it's a bit, got a bit more of an empirical, qualitative element to it. But I almost think to really connect with your audience you need to bring that behavioural, understandable, human side into it. Michelle, what is your kind of perspective as a data scientist around that empirical question, qualitative aspect versus quantitative, pure, that pure quantitative data. Oh, now we're really getting into it now. I think it's, it's, it's all, you know, in my mind it's all about the definition again. Right. So how are we defining it? I, you know, I'm a quant person, I want my numbers, I want to be able to measure something. I want to be able to measure it objectively. If I can measure something objectively, I find personally it's easier to explain, explain. But if I'm going to move into that qualitative area, then we're getting into the, hopefully I don't offend anybody, the touchy feely side of things. Right. And it's very difficult to explain that to everybody so that everybody has that same understanding. So yeah, so I'm, I'm all about the measurable. So if we're going to define productivity, can we measure it, can we measure it objectively and quantitatively? But you don't want to make, you know, it's, it's progress over, you know, perfection. Right. Because that's the thing is you could try to aim to have the perfect, you know, metric that no one understands. And so, you know, that's, I think there's again, trade offs. Right? 100%. Totally agree. Yeah. Well, and again it's about also having the skills and ability to understand the context of the data. Right. And so one of the, when it comes to labour productivity, agriculture has performed better than many other sectors of the economy. And that is not because the sector is radically more productive than it is Others could be using a traditional sense, but labour productivity uses GDP output as one of the, one of the denominators and we have had pretty significant growth because of high commodity prices. Again, it's high commodity prices often driving labour productivity growth, not kind of productivity as one would traditionally understand it. And so I'd like to kind of go around and get perspectives around the skills and. And do we have the ability to really understand what this data is telling us? Kevin, maybe I'll start with you on the top of the screen. Do we, do we have kind of the ability to understand the context that comes with all of these numbers? I think no would be my answer. I think it's like one of the skills that we train for at FPSC is digital literacy and just being able to understand what's going on. And I think. But I think there's a productivity literacy gap where it's a number of people like to talk about because they think they know how it is. But as we've already alluded to, people don't know how it's calculated and know what goes into it. But then the other thing is, quite often I hear it as, oh, Canada is not as productive as country X and looking at how it's made. And I'll use a seafood example. We were looking at Atlantic seafood specifically and this was pre pandemic. There was 9% foreign labour in Canadian Atlantic seafood manufacturing and 7% of that were TFWs and 2% were landed immigrants. And we then compared Iceland, Norway and the United States and it was 35%, 38% and 63% foreign labour. And so when you're comparing productivity and our industry was screaming we don't have enough, we don't have the people, we can, we're not competitive, we can't compete. And then we're like, well, we're lagging behind the usa. And when you look at the technology that's available, everyone had access to the same technology, but we need the people. And so it's trying to understand the context of the inputs and is there a barrier that's in Canada that's not in Iceland that we're comparing it to? And sometimes that's a policy barrier, sometimes that's just that Iceland can have, they're in the EU free labour zone. So there's all sorts of other factors in our calculations, but also in comparing to the other countries and quite often we'll lift up the can and, or open the lid and look deep at the Canadian metric without applying that same rigour to the countries that we're comparing it to to really understand are we lagging behind for real or is it like your example with the high commodity prices and we're looking better because the price of this commodity has tripled. So Brittany, you're on in a sector that's kind of on the front lines of that kind of understanding the context behind different data points. Probably lots of tease, Michelle's words, touchy feely reactions to pesticide, pesticide use data, and lots of different kind of reactions that are there. How much of the work that you do is around trying to help people understand the context of the data and how much of a, again, barrier is that to action at the end of the day? So my work specifically I'd say is at an arm's length of the data, more of like demonstrating how these tools are used responsibly. But, but going back to the productivity piece, like that's something we talk about a lot because we find that that resonates with how these innovations have contributed to improvements on the farm in the productivity space. And you know, using less land to produce more food is a key part of that and getting more involved in the total factor productivity through the gap report there because it does directly take the inputs used and the outputs of that one. So that's a growing space, I guess I'll say of interest for me in my role, but really making sure that we can collect the data is a bit of a struggle because pesticides are, I guess, is it a touchier subject? So ensuring that when we are asking farmers for data in general that we have like those privacy discussions ready and the data ownership discussions, I think that there's a real opportunity there in the data space, especially in, in my role with these plant science innovations. So definitely some, some work to do there, but looking forward to solving that. And I guess, Michelle, I'm curious, when you look at the kind of the data ecosystem work that you're doing, how much of that work is trying to solve kind of that point that Brittany just made around kind of understandings around ownership and willingness to share data. This came up a lot in our digital agriculture work where it's a concern that needs to be addressed. But is that a kind of a broader concern than just farmers that may be wondering about where their data is? No, that's a, that's a huge concern and one that we are trying to tackle by, by having these discussions with our researchers, with our stakeholders, trying to define, trying to define home or home ownership, data ownership. And you know, like I like to look at it as data sharing. You own the data, but are you going to give me the rights to share, to work with that data, data use agreements because I think that whole data ownership, it's a huge challenge and I think we see it at all the different levels, whether it's producer, researcher, association, government and so on. It's a challenge that I don't think we're going to solve in the immediate future but something that we're definitely working on. And just one of the challenges that I think that we run into across a variety of different issues but I think relates to this issue around skills development and kind of our capacity to understand the data, kind of we get into data ownership issues is, is that again there are resources that are needed to help kind of farmers and others in the ecosystem understand these things. It is unfortunate that governments at all levels seem to be pulling back extension services that could play a role in bridging that gap. But kind of what do you see the role of government in enabling, helping people understand, kind of build that data awareness capacity so that they can understand. When you see something like the national index, all of the different data points that are in it, people are better prepared to dig into it and understand it. So I mean one of the career long challenges of a data driven kind of public servant is trying to make data investments resonate with decision makers. And I think because a it's giving more money to government as opposed to farmers and, and and it also has become, it's harder to link it to directly to outcomes. And so it's been really challenging to, to kind of be able to get those kinds of investments. But, but I think they are very necessary and frankly I think that that's a really good role that the federal government should have. Like I think, you know, there are being that we can kind of put that infrastructure in place and let kind of the experts do their things in some ways with under that kind of infrastructure to me makes a lot of sense. And so I do think that if there's a way to develop some sort of partnership where, you know, different players come together, that might be a way to make it a little bit more interesting for the government and possibly be able to start thinking about some of those outcomes that could come from the work as well. But I think it's also like we have to be careful about not letting the technology get out ahead of our skills either. And it goes back to that skills piece. There's incredible amounts of technology but I'm not sure we're ready to use it all yet. And I think we need to make sure that the people do have the skills to capitalise on that, and it'll. Just make a point. Just maybe this is not for you, but for some of your colleagues in government that I think the vast majority of people that are on this webinar today, that are watching the webinar today would strongly support the governments or governments at all levels investing in that extension capacity. And we're still waiting on the details. But. But it is unfortunate to see once again, extension capacity being cut. And I can tell, like, that is one thing that I do want to say is, like we have heard very clearly through the sustainable agriculture strategy consultations, through everything, that extension is a priority. In our discussions with provinces and territories, they have told us extension is a priority. And I think we're trying to figure out in the context of the next policy framework, what does that mean? Because I think that puts the power in the hands of the producers as well, giving them the advice and allowing them to make decisions that are right for them. And I think it's good that you've heard that. I think one of the messages for those watching the webinar is I think we need to find a way as a sector to make that message resonate more politically so that when it does come time for governments to reduce budgets, this is not the first place that they go to cut, but hopefully one of the last places that they go to cut at the end of the day. And as they're thinking about investments for the next policy framework, again that this is a political priority for a targeted investment that can go a long way. I would like to pivot to one last topic before we bring Shaun back in. And there's a question that's come in around kind of starts referring to market demand for sustainability. I think that was something that was referenced when Amanda was talking about this earlier. You know, we know that there is, despite kind of backing off on some things in some places around sustainability reporting that isn't fully going going away. Large companies in Europe, Australia, other places are still going through this reporting of different scope, 1, 2, 3 emissions. But I think it also highlights one of the limitations, right, because a company reporting on their particular scope one, two or three emissions, is going to look different than a value chain reporting on it. And the question highlights variability within the data and different values depending on the context that we're in. And so the question is, I guess there's two questions here. What should Canadians be considering when looking at being market responsive? And so again, Brittany, maybe I'll start with you on that because again, you talk about demonstrating that sustainability out, telling that Storey again, that market responsiveness, I know is something that's kind of near and dear to crop life and to your members, because you want to be sensitive to that. How do you think about that market response, enough market responsiveness piece and how it plays into your sustainability work? Yeah. I think too, meeting people where they are, like what's important to them right now. I know top of mind is food security and food prices. So how are we telling our storey that meets people where they are and it really resonates with what's on their mind now is really important in this sustainability ecosystem. And really speaking their language, you know, we in ag, I'll generalise here, are really passionate about agriculture and what we do and can. Can over share at times or make this complex system very difficult to share. So really synthesising the key points down to what is relevant to the market today and what they're looking for, I think is really important. So we're always pivoting and needing to do something new and telling our storey. Right. It seems like that's probably been happening a lot lately. Would anybody else like to touch on this question of market responsiveness? And we can bring Shaun in and I'll give him the next question. Kevin, over to you. Yeah, I think it's important for the industry because I think certainly for food and beverage manufacturing, there's a perception challenge that a lot of the general public just have no concept of what our sector is and what role we play in. In getting food from the farms to their plate. And so with that lack of knowledge, like people, when they think manufacturing, they're not. Sustainability isn't the first word that pops into their thought bubble. And so being able to tell that storey and walk the walk like you can't pay lip service to something. So if you're telling the market that you're sustainable in these areas, you. You need to be that. But it's certainly not something where people are necessarily expecting to hear that from a meat processing company or a beer or something like that. And so how can. That's part of that. Telling the storey is taking advantage of the fact that people don't know anything about you. And so you can really tell them everything that you want them to know about where you are in your sustainability journey and where you want to get to. So I think that's a big opportunity for the sector to really grasp with both hands and. And use tools like the index to help tell that sorting. Shaun over to you. No, we can't hear you, Shaun. No. Is that a technical Issue. No, we don't. Oh, there you go. The technical issue is actually over here. Over here. Details. You're an amateur at this, Shaun. Details don't need to be disclosed or what just happened there. Tyler, I'm curious from your perspective as you listen to the such like depth of knowledge here of the panel, what's the. For you? What's the like, what's the. So what like what, what. What is that next thing that needs to happen for to make sure that we are fully leveraging some of this data and information like the index that it's producing. Yeah. So I often think about it in the work that we do from a policy perspective every day what the index does is hopefully gets us onto the same starting point. Right. And I think often we disagree around where agriculture, how well it's doing, how important or not it is, where needs to be improved. Hopefully what this does is creates a level playing field for at least when we're talking about what needs to be improved or doesn't that we're at least all talking about it the same way. And Jessica and I had the opportunity to sit around the sustainable ag strategy advisory table, unfortunately, that I don't think we'll see the light of day. But I think there was issues and a lot of those discussions about are we actually talking about this? Are we actually talking about the same things? And I think the index gives us a good. It doesn't tell us what the actions are, it doesn't tell us what the solution is. But I would not underestimate the value of that common understanding and that common starting point for those discussions and how much easier it makes things. Jesse, I'd be curious of your thoughts on that. I'd say I, I agree. I think, you know, I do find that with this sector in particular, there's not a lot of trust between the sector and, and government and, and you know that I understand where that comes from. But at the same time, I think that in order to kind of address some of these issues and kind of move past it, we're going to have to find a way to build that trust that, you know, some of us, like we want to kind of make this, this work. And so if there's a way to more clearly kind of bring the government in, I think, you know, that could maybe try to set something up. Like I do feel if we're talking about the sustainable agricultural strategy process, that definition of what sustainability was actually changed over the course of those consultations. And I think, you know, by the end we started Getting closer to having a similar understanding. But I'd say that wasn't the case at the beginning. And so I think that, you know, those conversations aren't really happening anymore, but maybe we need to kind of pick up from where that ended and try to kind of come to something together. Do, do we think at all and anybody can jump in here, do we think at all like when we talk about sustainability or it's mentioned? Well, my assumption or perception is a lot of people jump right to environmental sustainability and not economic sustainability as an example. Right. But sustainability is a pretty inclusive word of a number of different verticals. Does that hurt this discussion in trying to present the opportunity or leveraging some of the data that we have like in the index? I mean, I can start because I've kind of seen it firsthand that, you know, there was a point and I think, you know, it was during some of the sustainable agriculture strategy consultations where, you know, I would have some speaking engagements and even the word sustainability kind of, you know, had a negative reaction. And for me that was really unfortunate because it really does have a clear definition that is inclusive of a lot more. You know, there are the three pillars of sustainability, even in kind of sustainable development policy. And you know, I think I would really like to see, instead of giving up sustainability, trying to kind of build out that real definition that's more inclusive. I mean especially the government's going to be on side and we just have to kind of, you know, try to make sure that we keep pushing that instead of losing it, because it is a really important concept. Someone else with thoughts on that, maybe what we could do though, or. Sorry, Kevin, do you want to go ahead? Yeah, I think it's the real challenge because that is sort of the way that the media has conditioned it that it's environmental sustainability. And the environmental sort of got dropped and sustainability just became environmental. But I think for our sector especially how much of it is based in rural Canada, like that societal well being, the community aspect of what happens to a community if the food and beverage manufacturer closes, like hundreds of people lose their jobs and then what impact is on the community? And, and when you look at one facility closing or something like that has this knock on effect through the region. But when you look at national data, the numbers just change a little bit. But it has a massive impact in those, in those communities. And I think that, that being able to hold up the, the importance of the entire agriculture, food economy in rural Canada and keeping like being able to keep a pub open in a Small town, keeps trades in the town, which keeps other businesses in the town. And there's so many aspects of it that it's looking at sort of the health of these communities. And for me, that's a big spot where the government has a massive role to play in helping to knit all of those pieces together. Because each individual business, the farmer, the pub, the food beverage manufacturer, the truck driver, they'll all make whatever decision is right for their business. But what unites that community is the local government, provincial government, federal government, to knit everything together, to keep that coherent. And I think that is a larger, sustainable community. I think that's one aspect where right now we're really failing. And we have a lot of communities, rural ones especially, where when you look at the average age of some of the workforces, it's 55 or 57, and everyone knows that's not sustainable. But we're not really taking any action to say how do we do that, how do we get more young people to into lobster processing or something like that. So we're already a little over time, but I will go around. Kevin talked about some space where we're failing. I want to end on a positive note with our panellists and so give you all an opportunity to share one thing, one takeaway, where you think that we're actually closer to solving a sustainability data or policy challenge. And Kevin, I will go back to you. You can kick things off with your hopefully somehow optimistic note. So, yeah, I think that one thing I'm seeing is we did a, we did a survey and we asked about environmental sustainability as one specific aspect. And we found that a lot of people, we asked them whether they agree with the concept and some people said they didn't. But we had a larger group that said they were taking actions towards environmental sustainability, which included people that didn't even believe in it because people were also seeing the economic returns. And so for me, looking at some of these endpoints, and we found the same thing as well. Like I mentioned before about that being an employer, that represents that you're aware of some of these challenges and working towards them, that people want to stay. And so employers are seeing better retention rates when they're talking about the environmental impact that their facility has, or the way that they're paying a living wage or whatever they're doing. It's drawing more people in and they're seeing the real life outcomes of those changes and that's really moving things towards it and leaving whatever definitions behind. But people are moving in the right direction because they're seeing those returns. And I think having a tool like the index will help more people to see those returns and take their own steps down that pathway. So I am optimistic about where we're heading and I think that Canada is really well placed to be a sustainable food production leader. Great, thank you. Michelle, what's one thing where you see we're making progress? I think as we continue to see the index being used and developed and more people being able to use it and to see the impact, I see that the, oh my gosh, the PSADs increasing in value is the data. So seeing that data, the value of data being increased over time. So I think as we continue to see that benchmarking, see the impact, we're going to see the value of data increase. Great. Brittany, over to you. So while I think we're close to solving some of the data fragmentation and the silos that we have through these collaborative discussions and possibly crop protection metric or data source, close to solving that. So, yeah, looking forward to continuing this discussion next year. Great. Jess, where do you see progress? I see a lot of progress on the technology side. So I think we do have a lot of the tools that exist out there to be used to better connect data kind of from farm to kind of the waste end. And so I do feel like there's a lot that we. There's been so much progress in that direction. It's just that we haven't been able to really harness that technology and use it in a coordinated way. Right. Well, I would like to thank Jessica, Brittany, Michelle and Kevin for joining our panel discussion today. Really appreciate the contributions that you made. And to Amanda Richardson for kicking things off. Shaun, I am curious. You are out talking to farmers all of the time. I'm sure a lot of them probably roll their eyes when they hear about a sustainability index, but I've got to think if they actually looked at that kind of comprehensive view, they actually saw those economic numbers up against the environmental numbers, it would probably make more sense to them and they'd see the value of kind of what sustainability actually means. Right. Rather than just pulling it bits and pieces. Yeah, I think we did a massive disservice to the word sustainability by making it so focused on the environment for so long. And as far, you know, one of the big things that farmers will say was, well, to make my farm, to make my farm sustainable, my ranch sustainable, it's about being here for the next hundred years. Well, you know, but that. So, yeah, that, that is sustainability. Right. And economics play a part of that. And right now I think Canada is, is, is more focused than they've been in recent memory on, you know, dealing with competitiveness, dealing with productivity, focused on economic growth. And that fits into this sustainability discussion for sure. So I think we're doing a better service to people that have been really focused in this area for, by making it more broad. And we're trying to get out of, you know, the sustainability conversation that is, that happened in 2020 is different today. I, I see it at some of the industry meetings that I'm speaking at as, as well. The, the, the attitude has shifted and so it's important that we stay focused on that. So I think there's a lot of opportunity here for not only the, the farm gate, but also for the industry and stakeholders as well. And I think people that are watching, watching should go to Agri Food Index CA and actually look at the report because I think it actually does a really good job of, at a high level, showing the information. You know, you can kind of click through the different images, see kind of where the graphs are going up and down, and it makes it relatively easy to understand where are we making progress, where are we not? And again, it's not maybe as daunting as people make it out to be. Shaun, thank you very much again for joining us. I hope you enjoyed that webinar discussion today. Great stuff and appreciate everybody for signing up, participating today. A lot of great questions in the chat and look forward to the next Real Agriculture CAPI webinar coming up in a month. Cheers everybody.