Plus c’est la même chose? Questioning crop diversification as a response to agricultural deregulation in Saskatchewan, Canada
Introduction
This paper contributes to a growing body of scholarship that questions the postulated end of certain characteristic trends of post-1945 Western agriculture as a result of, or perhaps in tandem with, recent changes in economy, society and governance (see Morris and Evans, 1999; Hoggart and Paniagua, 2001; Wilson 2001). Its empirical focus is crop diversification, or more precisely the degree to which individual farmers in an agricultural region noted for its specialized cropping patterns have recently shifted towards more diverse ones in the context of a historically and financially significant policy change that mirrors broader shifts in the regulation of agriculture in the West.
While the 2002 United States Farm Bill and the seeming intransigence of the European Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) might suggest otherwise, government support to farmers in much of the developed world has declined significantly over the past decade or so (OECD, various years). For example, in the mid-1980s, aggressive and lasting agricultural policy reforms were implemented in Australia and New Zealand. Indeed, current levels of subsidization in New Zealand equate to no more than 1% of total farm receipts. Although less severe in both the speed of enactment and degree of change, North American producers experienced notable reductions in support in the 1990s. In the case of Canada, support declined from 49% of farm receipts in 1990 to just 14% by 1997. Even in Europe, the termination of input subsidies and the reduction of price and export supports stemming from the 1992 MacSharry Reforms to the CAP has led to lower overall levels of support.
In light of this decline, whether realized or anticipated, increasing scholarly attention has been directed towards identifying the implications of agricultural re/deregulation,1 and market liberalization more generally, for farm-level production practices and the condition or well-being of agroecosystems (e.g. Abler and Shortle, 1992; Anderson, 1992; Bredahl et al., 1996; Krissoff et al., 1996; Bradshaw and Smit, 1997; Antle et al., 1998; OECD, 1998; Potter and Goodwin, 1998; Redclift et al., 1999; Winter, 2000). A common belief within much of this literature, reflecting what Marsden (1998) terms the ‘neoclassical option’, contends that by reducing overall support levels and decoupling remaining support from production decisions, farmers are compelled to make more efficient use of costly inputs like agrochemicals and, more generally, reduce the intensity of their operations, which together can be expected to result in less environmental degradation.2 Additionally, and of relevance to this paper, some analysts have explicitly predicted (e.g. Terrestrial and Aquatic Environmental Managers, 1992; Rosegrant et al., 1995), while others have implied (e.g. Abler and Shortle, 1992; Potter and Goodwin, 1998), increased output diversity at the individual farm scale. Interestingly, similar intimations have been expressed within early conceptualizations of post-productivist agriculture beyond the specific context of agricultural policy reform (e.g. Ilbery and Bowler, 1998). From an environmental perspective, agricultural operations comprised of a greater diversity of outputs are thought to have a more benign impact upon regional ecosystems. Support for this assumption derives from the identification of, for example, reduced pesticide and fertilizer use, and improved soil nutrient balances in such systems (see Altieri, 1987; Gliessman, 1990; Paoletti et al., 1992). Hence, projections of output diversification under deregulation are welcomed by those seeking more environmentally sustainable forms of agriculture.
This paper assesses this projection based on evidence from Saskatchewan, Canada. As the historical centre of wheat production in Canada and an important contributor to world wheat supplies,3 Saskatchewan's agricultural landscape has taken on many of the key characteristics of productivist agriculture, including output specialization. However, owing to recent policy changes in Canadian agriculture, and the Prairies in particular, Saskatchewan's arable producers have entered a new regulatory era. The key change was the 1995 termination of the Western Grain Transportation Act (WGTA), a century old export subsidy for producers of grains and oilseeds. This change came in addition to the discontinuation of a commodity-based revenue protection program, the Gross Revenue Insurance Plan, in the same year. How thousands of arable farmers in the province are responding to these new conditions, especially with respect to cropping patterns and diversity, is a question of particular interest to Canadian agricultural officials (see Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 1998) and those concerned with the environmental implications of agricultural deregulation.
The paper proceeds in four parts. First, the various forms and definitions of diversification adopted in the literatures on agricultural policy, agricultural risk-management, agricultural/rural restructuring and post-productivist agriculture are reviewed in order to clarify its meaning, especially as used by those projecting increases in the future. In Section 3, the history of Canada's WGTA is outlined as a prelude to, and context for, an analysis of crop data for a sample of roughly 10,000 Saskatchewan arable farmers for the period 1994–2000 that reveals the degree to which these operators have chosen to diversify over that time. Given the limited evidence of crop diversification in the Saskatchewan case, a discussion follows of the various limitations to adopting an output diversification strategy to manage market and other risks, and the likelihood of farmers further pursuing output specialization in an era of reduced government support and increasingly chaotic commodity markets. Lastly, certain conclusions are drawn.
Section snippets
Forms and definitions of diversification
While the causal links are complex, the subsidization of agriculture by governments over the past half-century is thought to have encouraged a trend towards output specialization at both the regional and individual farm scales (Bowler, 1985; US National Research Council, 1989). In particular, it is argued that the provision of commodity-specific price support and publicly funded crop insurance has directly promoted and indirectly enabled the widespread adoption of a strategy of expansion and
Cropping patterns and diversity in Saskatchewan, 1994–2000
The historical roots of the WGTA can be traced to a 1897 deal between the Canadian federal government and the Canadian Pacific Railway, popularly known as the Crow's Nest Pass Agreement. The agreement provided the railway with a construction subsidy to extend their network from southern Alberta west to the Kootenay Valley in British Columbia through the Crow's Nest Pass in exchange for a freight rate ceiling on export grains heading east to the port of Thunder Bay. These fixed rates were later
Discussion
In contrast to certain intimations, speculations and/or specific projections, individual arable farmers in Saskatchewan do not appear to have pursued a strategy of crop diversification following the loss of an historically significant export subsidy. Is this result truly surprising? While conventional risk-management theory might identify crop diversification as a means of managing the production and marketing risks associated with arable operations, decisions to significantly alter cropping
Conclusions
While inconsistent across regions, agricultural producers in the West have generally experienced a notable decline in state financial support over the past decade or so. For advocates of policy reform, such as the OECD (1998), a purported added benefit of deregulation is its environmentally favourable impact on farm-level production decisions. Not only are farmers expected to reduce the intensity of their operations, but some analysts have explicitly predicted, while others have implied, a
Acknowledgements
This research was supported through fellowships from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and Simon Fraser University. Additionally, the author gratefully acknowledges the cooperative efforts of Statistics Canada and Iain Wallace, the research assistance of Audric Beauchesne and Evan Fraser, and the editorial advice of Chris Cocklin, Barry Smit and two anonymous reviewers.
References (89)
- et al.
Farm pluriactivity and rural policysome evidence from wales
Journal of Rural Studies
(1994) - et al.
Regulated freedomsthe market and the state, agriculture and the environment
Journal of Rural Studies
(2000) Modelling farm diversification in regions using expert and decision support systems
Journal of Rural Studies
(1999)- et al.
The development of alternative farm enterprisesa study of family labour farms in the northern Pennines of England
Journal of Rural Studies
(1996) - et al.
Subsidy removal and agroecosystem health
Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment
(1997) Entrepreneurs in the rural environment
Journal of Rural studies
(1989)- et al.
What rural restructuring?
Journal of Rural Studies
(2001) Farm diversification as an adjustment strategy on the urban fringe of the West Midlands
Journal of Rural Studies
(1991)Farm diversification in England and Wales—what can we learn from the farm business survey
Journal of Rural Studies
(2001)- et al.
Strategies for coping in capitalist agriculturean examination of the response of farm families in British agriculture
Geoforum
(1989)
Agroecosystem biodiversity; matching production and conservation biology
Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment
Agriculture, sustainability and the imperatives of policy reform
Geoforum
Agricultural liberalization in the European Unionan analysis of the implications for nature conservation
Journal of Rural Studies
Agricultural diversification and policy reform
Food Policy
Water policy for efficient agricultural diversificationmarket-based approaches
Food Policy
Price stabilization, liberalization and food securityconflicts and resolutions?
Food Policy
Strong policy or weak policy? The environmental impact of the 1992 reforms of to the CAP arable regime in Great Britain
Journal of Rural Studies
Environmental and farm commodity policy linkages in the US and the EC
European Review of Agricultural Economics
AgroecologyThe Scientific Basis of Alternative Agriculture
Agricultural trade liberalisation and the environmenta global perspective
The World Economy
Agriculture, Trade and the EnvironmentThe Impact of Liberalization on Sustainable Development
Food in SocietyEconomy, Culture, Geography
Fertiliser and sustainable land management in pastoral farmingnorthland
Decoupled agricultural policy and the lack of production alternatives
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics
Trends and patterns of agricultural structural changea Canada-US comparison
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics (special issue)
Agriculture under the CAPA Geography
Endogenous agricultural development in Western Europe
Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie
Agriculture, Trade and the EnvironmentDiscovering and Measuring the Critical Linkages
State deregulation and New Zealand's agricultural sector
Sociologia Ruralis
Pluriactivity in (and beyond?) a regulationist crisis
New Zealand Geographer
Pluriactivity in rural Norway
Journal of Rural Studies
The pluriactivity, part-time farming, and farm diversification debate
Environment and Planning A
The welfare effects of deregulating producer prices
American Journal of Agricultural Economics
Structural crises of adjustment, business cycles and investment behaviour
Food politicsnew dangers, new possibilities
Organizational, institutional and social factors in agricultural diversificationObservations from the Canadian plains
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics
Sustainable communities and sustainable agriculture on the Prairies
AgroecologyResearching the Ecological Basis for Sustainable Agriculture
Long term trends in agricultural specialization in the United Statessome preliminary results
Agricultural History
Cited by (42)
Effect of climate change induced agricultural risk on land use in Chinese small farms: Implications for adaptation strategy
2020, Ecological IndicatorsCitation Excerpt :In literature, some studies have also discussed about farmers’ strategies of adapting to climate change. Changing cropping system, crop diversifications, improving irrigation facilities and applying innovative crop production technologies are considered as effective options (Amadou et al., 2018; Bradshaw, 2004; Karimi et al., 2018; Lungarska and Chakir, 2018). Wang et al. (2010) found that farmers across China shall increase the cultivated areas of cotton, wheat, oil crops and maize, but reduce the areas of rice, soybean, vegetables, potato and sugar whenever the temperature rises.
Socio economic impacts of Doha Model water harvesting structures in Jalna, Maharashtra
2019, Agricultural Water ManagementAgricultural “greening” and cropland diversification trends: Potential contribution of agroenergy crops in Capitanata (South Italy)
2018, Land Use PolicyCitation Excerpt :Considering the specific topic of this work, here agricultural diversification refers to the shift from the dominance of one or just a few crops (i.e. crop specialization and, at least, monoculture) to the cultivation of a larger number of species. Other and broader definitions of agricultural diversification are available in the literature, mainly related to the economic and structural interpretation of farming (Bradshaw, 2004; Dries et al., 2012). In ecological terms, crop diversity positively affects agro-ecosystem functioning (Davis et al., 2012).
Family as a catalyst in farms' diversifying agricultural products: A mixed methods analysis of diversified and non-diversified farms in Indiana, Michigan and Ohio
2017, Journal of Rural StudiesCitation Excerpt :Many recent recommendations for high priority research in sustainability focus on farms with diversified production systems, because of the insights they may yield as a result of their differences from dominant agricultural systems (National Resource Council, 2010). Economically, agricultural risk management theory positions product diversification as a strategy to spread risk while increasing income (Bradshaw, 2004). An aim of diversification is to increase net revenue, with some evidence that this strategy can improve the long- and short-term viability of the farm (Barnes et al., 2015).
Food, farmers, and the future: Investigating prospects of increased food production within a national context
2017, Land Use PolicyCitation Excerpt :Moreover, structural features, such as the size of fields and the distance between fields, as well as ownership of land, clearly matter (Demetriou et al., 2012; Forbord et al., 2014; Jabarin and Epplin, 1994; van Dijk, 2003). Looking beyond the agronomic conditions, Bradshaw (2004) found output specialization to be a feature of productivism, while output diversification characterized post-productivism, and concluded that farmers specialize for reasons other than government subsidies. Gorton et al. (2008) showed that farmers retain a productivist mindset regardless of the orientation of agricultural policy.