The Rural Voice, 1990-03, Page 30AGRICULTURAL
RESEARCH:
SHIFTING
PRIORITIES
AS WE ENTER THE NEW
decade and look towards the end
of the century, and the millenium,
thoughts naturally tum to the future.
The agricultural sector is no different
— the start of 1990 brought a flurry of
analyses and predictions.
For those concerned with agricul-
tural research, this process of examin-
ation has been going on since the mid-
dle of the 1980s. In 1986, the Nation-
al Agricultural Strategy (NAS) was
signed by the federal and provincial
ministers of agriculture. It made a
number of statements about agricul-
tural research and technology.
In turn, the points in the NAS were
considered by a federal -provincial task
force, chaired by Dr. A. 0. Olson, fed-
eral assistant deputy minister for re-
search, which put together a five-part
document (soon to be seven) entitled
Canadian Agricultural Research and
Technology Transfer: Planning for
the Future (CARTT).
In CARTT, the agricultural
research perspectives of the federal
government, provincial governments,
and private industry were examined,
and an Agriculture Canada proposal
for action laid out.
According to Dr. Olson, "there are
a bunch of very simple philosophical
statements that have predicated this
process." The first is that all govern-
ments are downsizing in response to
economic changes, and agricultural
research has not been exempted.
Second, "Agriculture Canada
cannot be all things to all people." In
other words, if the Research Branch is
spread too thinly, it can't work effec-
tively. Finally, "Agriculture Canada is
not the only player; there is a strong
university segment in Canada, and a
growing private sector."
However, as Agriculture Canada
A look at the results from
the task force: Canadian
Agricultural Research
and Technology Transfer:
Planning for the Future
by Ian Wylie-Toal
is responsible for about 50 per cent of
all the agricultural research in Canada,
what that organization says and does
is important for the state of research in
the country. A review of every pro-
gram in the Research Branch is highly
significant.
The Research Branch has been
"setting priorities for two and a half
years," Dr. Olson says. The downsiz-
ing that occurred prior to this, he adds,
was accomplished by attrition: "it was
not program related, it was not related
to priorities whatsoever. I don't hap-
pen to like that process, but by using
attrition ... you don't hurt anybody."
"I think the government has
sent a very clear message that we
will try to maintain what we are
doing, but the private sector and
the other players better pull up
their socks."
But downsizing, Dr. Olson says,
"left us with chaos, because there was
no continuity — we lost the wrong
people from the right programs."
As well as the chaos it generated
in Research Branch programs, down-
sizing had another immediate effect:
it reduced research money, staff, and
resources. As staff retired and budgets
were cut, it became physically impos-
sible for the branch to operate in the
manner to which it had become accus-
tomed. A change had to take place,
and the raison d' etre of the branch
had to be re-examined.
The new priorities and structure
of the branch are outlined in detail in
Volume 5 of CARTT. In general, the
trend will be towards the consolidation
of resources and workers. "Agricul-
ture Canada," CARTT states, "will
place more emphasis on long-term
research and gradually de-emphasize
short-term or service -type work that
can be done as well by others."
Scientists, it adds, will work less
on individual projects and more as a
part of multidisciplinary teams, which
"will focus on specific problems and
opportunities."
Dr. Olson sees this focusing as a
way to best utilize the strengths of the
branch. If Agriculture Canada tried to
cover all the research bases, he says,
"we wouldn't be doing very much of
anything, we'd be doing a lot of little
things." Instead, he would like to see
"expanded programs in the areas
where our primary skill, which is the
fact that we're here for the long term,
is utilized and expanded."
According to CARTT, the new
mission of the branch is to "improve
the long-term marketability of agri-
food products by decreasing unit costs
of production, more efficient use of
capital expenditures, and environ-
mentally safe management practices."
The development of "new crops with
significant market opportunity" is also
singled out for greater emphasis.
Exactly what this means is hard to
assess. If this is the "new" mission of
the Research Branch, then what has it
been doing for the past 100 years?
And if the new mission is not radically
different from the old, does this mean
that the branch will simply be doing
less research?
Some specifics of the new mission
can be gleaned. CARTT says that
areas "of low priority, including
present commitments to service and to
performance and efficacy testing, will
be phased out as opportunities arise."
Such activities are to be taken over by
"other research partners."
26 THE RURAL VOICE