SECTOR SIGNALS:  Focus on the agriculture sector (scroll down to see stories).

POSTSECONDARY INSTITUTIONS

 Postsecondary institutions should view their programs through a “value lens” focused on students

Postsecondary institutions need to start seeing their programs through a “value lens” and what they offer to students, according to an article in University Affairs.

For students considering admission to, or continuation in, postsecondary programs, the value proposition is not always clear, Loleen Berdahl, executive director of the Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy at the University of Saskatchewan (USask) and University of Regina, and Marjorie Delbaere, a professor of marketing and interim vice-provost, students and learning, at USask, write in the article.

As Canadian universities seek to retain and build domestic student markets to replace decreases in international students, postsecondary institutions will be increasingly challenged to think about their programs through a value lens, they said.

In using the term “value,” they are referring to the economic concept of value in use. From this perspective, value is subjective; it is defined by people using a product and is based on their perceptions of the usefulness of that product.

A product, in this context, is a broad category that includes physical goods, professional services and experiences. Value from this perspective is co-created by the providers of the product and the users of the product. 

To support informed student choices, universities must be explicit about the value they are offering students, Berdahl and Delbaere said.

“And as student decisions are often based on programs rather institutions, it is important that faculty members consider value to students when they are designing and updating programs. Key factors include experience, outcomes, and cost.”

The authors said key factors to consider are:

Student experience. What is the educational journey like? Factors may include convenience and flexibility, student engagement and cohort opportunities, teaching quality, class sizes, diversity of the student body, access to experiential learning and work-integrated learning, university services and amenities, campus culture, and geographic location. Questions to consider include:

• How does our program design support the student connection and engagement? Allow for convenience and flexibility? Ensure high quality teaching and student supports? What design changes might be made to increase the experience value for students?
• How does our program marketing ensure that students are aware of the experience value we offer?

Expected outcomes. What opportunities (“destinations”) lie at the end of the educational journey? How does this support the student’s professional and personal goals? Factors here might include connections between programs and career skills or pathways, career entry or advancement, access to alumni networks, university or program prestige, expected earnings in their future career, and enjoyment of their career. Ask yourself:

• How does our program design explicitly develop career-relevant skills and knowledge? Connect to career pathways for students? Foster connections to alumni networks and/or career development? What design changes might be made to increase the outcome value for students?
• How does our program marketing ensure that students are aware of the outcome value we offer?

Costs and incentives. Can the student afford to take the educational journey to get to the destination? Factors here include tuition and fees, cost of living, and scholarships or other financial supports. Consider the following:

• Given the program and living costs (which are typically outside a postsecondary unit’s influence), how does the program design create a positive return on investment for students? What financial supports and awards are available to students in your program? 
• How does our program marketing ensure that students are aware of the financial supports and awards available to them?

Students will weigh these value drivers differently depending upon their personal circumstances and goals, Berdahl and Delbaere said.

Students with fewer fiscal resources may prioritize costs and affordability. For non-traditional students with increased non-academic responsibilities, convenience and flexibility can mean the difference between selecting or not selecting a program. Students who see higher education primarily as career development might value skill and knowledge outcomes. Students who are concerned about social connection may prioritize experience factors.  

Programs cannot be all things to all prospective students and should not try to be, Berdahl and Delbaere said. Different programs will have different value propositions. The important thing is to ensure that the program’s value proposition is clearly defined and articulated.

“It isn’t enough to design valuable programs and market them to students; we also need to deliver on the value that we promise. This requires continued attention to student experience and outcomes.”

Periodic external program reviews and accreditation processes can be helpful, but occur too infrequently to serve as the only tool to ensure program value is being delivered. While respecting academic freedom of colleagues, postsecondary institution units will want to identify how they will collectively commit to and assess the value of the programs they are delivering. 

“Universities are increasingly under pressure to articulate their value. We strongly believe that our programs have tremendous value, but in many cases the value proposition is unclear or misunderstood,” Berdahl and Delbaere said. “Looking at our programs from a student perspective through a value lens can help us identify ways to improve understanding of this value.” University Affairs

****************************************************************************************************************************

Higher learning institutions should promote learning pathways that are flexible, aligned and offer long-term value

Higher learning institutions need to rethink how learning pathways are constructed – promoting flexibility, alignment and long-term value for both learners and institutions, according to an article in The evoLLLution.

As workforce needs shift, talent mobility accelerates, and learners demand greater agency over their educational journeys, institutions are under increasing pressure to design learning pathways that are both academically rigorous and economically sustainable, Catherine Chandler-Crichlow, vice-provost and dean of the School of Continuing Studies at the University of Toronto, wrote in the article.

One of the most significant shifts underway is the move from linear, one-size-fits-all programs toward modular and stackable learning experiences, she said. Learners no longer view education as a single chapter early in life. They expect to enter, exit, and re-enter learning as their careers evolve.

Stackable credentials – particularly micro-credentials – play a critical role here, she added. When designed intentionally, they allow learners to build skills incrementally while maintaining momentum toward a larger goal, whether that’s a certificate, credential, or degree.

For institutions, stackability serves as a signal of long-term relevance. It creates pathways that grow with the learner rather than expiring once a single outcome is achieved.

“But stackability is not just about breaking programs into smaller parts. It requires thoughtful design so each component holds independent value while contributing to a coherent whole that is recognized by employers.”

Not every program that attracts learner interest will create durable institutional value, Chandler-Crichlow noted. Likewise, not every strategically important initiative will resonate with learners on its own.

The most successful pathways are built at the intersection of these two forces. Institutions must deeply understand what learners are trying to achieve – career mobility, skill relevance, recognition in the labor market – while also remaining clear on their own strategic priorities, capacity constraints, and areas of strength.

This alignment doesn’t happen automatically, she pointed out. It requires active listening, employer engagement, and a willingness to co-design learning experiences that reflect both individual aspiration and organizational direction. “When that alignment is achieved, institutions move beyond reactive program development and toward offerings that deliver sustained impact.”

A common concern is whether flexible, short-cycle learning can be scaled responsibly. The reality is that modular learning is often more operationally manageable than traditional multi-year programs, Chandler-Crichlow said.

Micro-learning and micro-credentials allow institutions to introduce, test and refine offerings with greater agility. Smaller modules are easier to update, easier to distribute across audiences, and easier to align with emerging needs. When supported by the right systems and governance structures, they can be deployed at scale without overwhelming administrative teams.

“The key is having operational frameworks that support continuous iteration – rather than treating every new offering as a bespoke initiative.”

Continuing education units have long served as innovation engines within higher education. Their ability to move quickly, partner externally, and respond to workforce demand positions them as critical contributors to institutional growth strategies.

Today, that role is expanding, Chandler-Crichlow said. Continuing education units are increasingly responsible for creating pathways that span sectors, recognize prior learning, and accommodate learners entering from diverse backgrounds and regions. In an era of unprecedented talent mobility, these units are often the first to experiment with new credential models, co-delivery approaches, and cross-sector collaboration.

Their success depends on maintaining agility while staying connected to the broader academic mission – ensuring that innovation enhances, rather than fragments, the institutional ecosystem, she said.

The future of higher education pathways will not be defined by a single credential type or delivery model, she added. It will be defined by institutions’ ability to design systems that are responsive without being reactive, flexible without being fragmented, and learner-centered without losing academic coherence.

This moment calls for intentional design – pathways that honor lifelong learning, reflect real workforce needs, and create value that endures beyond the next trend cycle, Chandler-Crichlow said.

“Institutions that invest in this approach will be better positioned not just to adapt to change, but to lead through it. Because in a world where learning never stops, the pathways we build today must be ready for tomorrow – and the many tomorrows that follow.” The evoLLLution

****************************************************************************************************************************

Current times call for postsecondary institutions to rethink their role in society – can’t afford to be “ivory towers”

Postsecondary institutions must start rethinking their role in society in this time of geopolitical changes, technological revolutions, threats to sovereignty, economic instability and a funding crisis, said Marie-Eve Sylvestre, president of the University of Ottawa.

“Becoming a leader at this point in time is a great privilege – yet a major responsibility,” Sylvestre said in article in University Affairs, by Mohamed Berrada, associate editor, francophone for Affaires Universitaires.

“For centuries, universities have been spaces for discussion, dialogue and knowledge production. They play a critical role in society,” Sylvestre said.

She argued that the university can’t afford to be an ivory tower. Rather, research must be “rooted in the needs of communities” and be conducted in partnership with them.

“Research needs to generate more than just knowledge,” she said. “Actions and concrete outcomes must follow.” 

“Universities don’t just train students for the workforce – they shape citizens,” she added. Put another way, universities have a scientific, social and civic mission. 

With that in mind, Sylvestre makes the case for research that is “socially engaged and relevant, that makes a difference in communities.” This approach is intended to serve as a natural extension of the ideals of scientific excellence.

“We can’t ignore performance indicators and metrics,” she said. “But we also can’t lose sight of the human and qualitative dimensions of our work.” 

Before becoming president of the University of Ottawa, Sylvestre was co-chair of the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom. To her, academic freedom and free speech are priorities. 

“Universities must remain sites of discussion, debate and critique where students are exposed to different perspectives and new ideas,” she said. According to Sylvestre, freedom of expression as an essential precondition for both research and education. 

But free speech is not without its limits. “It’s also crucial that universities be free from hate speech, racism, and discrimination,” she said.

She noted that “academic environments are not monoliths,” and that “these issues may be handled differently depending on whether you’re in class, attending a talk, or in a public space. Ultimately, we have certain responsibilities to our captive audiences.” 

As for funding, recent federal caps on international study permits have exposed how fragile academic funding has become. “We’re losing more than just money,” she said. “We’re also losing potential, especially in strategic sectors like science and health.” 

But Sylvestre also sees these challenges as an opportunity. “This may be our moment to set up a new social contract with the public, to say: ‘You can count on us to train talent and produce the research our country needs. But in exchange, we need your support.’” 

When asked where she sees the university in five years, Sylvestre replied more in terms of cultural transformations than administrative reform. “I’d like my legacy to be a culture shift – to have produced a culture of engagement, mobilization, and pride.” 

She said she hopes to build an “ambitious and bold” university where “big ideas – even radical ones – can be freely pursued.”

“Bilingualism, diversity, interdisciplinary research, international reach – anything that seems complex or challenging is what makes our universities so rich and our communities so vibrant,” Sylvestre said. University Affairs

*******************************************************************************************************************************

University continuing education units can make a greater contribution to Canada than they have with more visibility, alignment and support

University continuing education units (UCE) can advance workforce resilience, build a learning society and foster equity in Canada, according to a report by the Canadian Association for University Continuing Education (CAUCE).

Over the past two decades, UCE units have become valued for the nimbleness and responsiveness sought by institutions, employers and policymakers, the report said.

It is often within these units that educational opportunities for working and transitioning adults, including mid- to late-career professionals and internationally educated professionals seeking to bridge and advance their skills in a Canadian context, are most effectively pursued, the report said.

UCE units have consistently pioneered innovations in program delivery, embracing distance education and online learning, including developing massive open online courses and various forms of credential innovation, CAUCE said.

They were instrumental in guiding emergency online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic, demonstrating their agility and centrality in moments of national need.

And now, they are exploring the transformative potential of generative AI to enrich and personalize adult learning experiences.

UCE units also play a vital economic role by enabling labour market mobility through short-cycle, career-aligned programs designed for upskilling and reskilling.

This includes enhanced and targeted support for underrepresented groups such as Indigenous learners, newcomers to Canada, and other equity-deserving populations.

Survey data from CAUCE member institutions (CAUCE tri-annual survey) attests that UCE units collectively serve tens of thousands of Canadians and newcomers each year, the majority of whom are pursuing skills education and training.

These programs span critical sectors of national, provincial/territorial, and local importance including cybersecurity, advanced manufacturing, the green economy, digital business innovation, agriculture, and artificial intelligence. “These are key areas that underpin Canada’s economic competitiveness and future prosperity.”

Approximately half of reported enrolments are concentrated in career and workforce development programming, underscoring UCE units’ alignment with Canada’s labour and economic development goals.

Yet despite these efforts, achieving coherence across the system remains a challenge, the report noted. In this context, UCE units are uniquely positioned to provide the structure, strategy and shared purpose needed to align skills development with system-wide priorities. “They should be recognized not as peripheral service providers, but as strategic actors within universities and the broader postsecondary ecosystem.”

Fiscal realities further underscore the importance of UCE’s approach. As governments face tighter budgets and universities can no longer rely on revenue-side growth strategies alone, UCE units demonstrate how cost-effective innovation can deliver measurable social and economic outcomes.

They achieve this through shared governance and revenue-sharing arrangements with faculties, leveraging subject-matter experts from academia and industry, and maintaining lean but robust administrative capacity.

“UCE units are ideally positioned to lead this cultural shift toward agility, accountability and cross-sector collaboration. Their success depends on a willingness to experiment boldly and to disseminate the lessons learned widely.”

Greater visibility and alignment of UCE units would strengthen the ability of governments and institutions to coordinate investments, track outcomes and build a more connected system of lifelong learning, the report said.

At this critical juncture in shaping its workforce and education future, Canada needs a common lifelong learning strategy that unites provinces, territories, employers and institutions in pursuit of inclusive, practical and high-quality opportunities for all learners, according to the report.

This moment calls for renewed ambition across the postsecondary system and among its partners, the report said. It demands investment in infrastructures of lifelong learning that are already operating at scale and with impact, yet often remain outside traditional policy frameworks.

By coordinating policies, connecting programs and amplifying local strengths, UCE units can help build a cohesive and future-ready workforce development system, the report said.

“The creation of a truly pan-Canadian lifelong learning ecosystem requires not only shared vision, but also the institutional actors capable of making it real. UCE, working collectively through CAUCE, is ready to lead in this effort.” CAUCE

*******************************************************************************************************************************

Postsecondary student unions in Ontario are protesting two aspects of the Government of Ontario’s recently announced funding model: the removal of the tuition freeze and the decision to reduce the maximum proportion of Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP) grants from 85 percent to 25 percent. While stakeholders noted that the changes to the Ontario funding system were necessary for the foundation of the system, students and student advocacy groups said that the tuition and OSAP changes could affect affordability, increase student debt, and discourage students from going to higher ed. Starting with the 2026-2027 school year, publicly-assisted colleges and universities will be able to raise tuition fees by up to two per cent per year for the next three years. After that, increases will be limited to either two per cent or the average inflation rate, whichever is lower. “We are definitely concerned about people’s ability to attend university and afford university,” Omar Sayyed, vice-president of finance for the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance, told CBC News.  Student leaders called on the government to reassess the changes or implement new supports. CBC News

Okanagan College received a $10-million donation from the Hall Family Foundation to establish the Hall School of Business and Entrepreneurship. The gift – which Okanagan College said is the largest given to a public college in the province – will also create the Hall Entrepreneurship Incubator. The donation will provide seed funding for entrepreneurs who are testing business concepts, support curriculum and program development and enable access to entrepreneurs-in-residence. Ed Hall was the co-founder of Canadian Adult Communities and Regency Retirement Resorts, both highly successful in offering transformational and enriching retirement living alternatives throughout the Okanagan Valley. “It is our goal to try to light that spark in many more young people today so that they, too, may enjoy the fruits of their entrepreneurial and business endeavors,” said Fraser Hall, speaking on behalf of the family. Okanagan College

The University of New Brunswick (UNB) officially launched the Centre for Learning Futures (CLF) and formed a new partnership with the Fredericton Chamber of Commerce. CLF’s portfolio now comprises four core units: UNB Online; Transformative Teaching and Learning; Language and Leisure Learning; and Experiential Education. These four units support UNB’s growth priorities by expanding access to academic and professional learning, strengthening community engagement, and connecting students with real-world experience. UNB and the Fredericton Chamber of Commerce will support professional development needs and inform the expansion of learning pathways, micro-credentials, and professional development opportunities. University of New Brunswick

The University of Alberta (U of A) has proposed removing Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) from its hiring policy, CBC News reported. The move comes a year after U of A’s President Bill Flanagan announced that the U of A was moving away from the term, saying it had become polarizing for some. Currently, the policy states that when evaluating two similarly qualified candidates, hiring panels should favour candidates from historically underrepresented groups. A new draft recruitment policy heading to the board of governors for approval removes that practice and eliminates references to the university’s commitments to correct employment disadvantages. The university said in a statement that the new draft policy has been through extensive consultations since June 2025. “While the current policy includes aspirational language about fair recruitment and the removal of barriers, the university has found in practice that qualified candidates may still face barriers.” The university said the proposed new policy is intended as a step toward addressing that issue. But some members of the university say they worry the move shows a lack of transparency and walks back commitments. The issue was discussed at a general faculties council where Lise Gotell, a professor of women’s and gender studies, tabled a motion opposing it, which council passed. Gotell told CBC News the board of governors ultimately gets the final say, but matters such as academic hiring have historically been left up to the general faculties council. She said academics should have been consulted and she was surprised to see the issue on the agenda. CBC News

CANADA’S CURRENT & FUTURE WORKFORCE

The Government of Canada is launching five additional Workforce Alliances in the following priority sectors, which have a significant impact on aspects of everyday life for Canadians:

• Housing and Construction.
• Transportation and Supply Chains.
• Energy and Electricity.
• Mining and Minerals.
• Care Economy.

The Workforce Alliances, which also include Advanced Manufacturing, are unified by one core mission: to identify and address pressing labour market challenges and to coordinate public and private investments in skills development to produce lasting opportunities for Canada’s workers where they are most needed to Build Canada Strong. Minister of Jobs and Families Patty Hajdu and federal officials will conclude discussions with employers, unions, educational institutions, industry associations and Indigenous partners in the coming weeks to confirm and announce the leadership and priorities for all six Workforce Alliances. Hajdu also announced that the federal government is now accepting applications for the new Worker Retention Grant for Work-Sharing Employers. A federal government investment of about $102.7 million over two years for the grant builds on the Work-Sharing program, which helps businesses avoid layoffs by letting eligible workers share available work and claim employment Insurance for the lost hours. Employers with active Work-Sharing agreements can now apply for the grant and use the funds to support their work-sharing employees to upskill and adapt to changing labour market needs. The top-up will allow them to maintain their income while training during lost work time at levels closer to their normal wages, up to 70 percent of their full-time pay. To make it easier to identify training options, Job Bank, Canada’s national employment service, has created a dedicated section for work-sharing employers. It includes a new Training Finder and direct connections to upskilling platforms with information about thousands of courses, including low- or no-cost options. Employment and Social Development Canada

The Government of Ontario is launching Canada’s first Occupational Exposure Registry. This new secure digital portal includes an easy-to-use self-tracker that allows workers to record and track exposure to hazardous substances in the workplace. The portal builds on the government's work to strengthen workplace health and safety by taking action to increase awareness and reduce harmful exposures, while giving workers a secure record they can reference throughout their careers. Workers can securely and anonymously submit exposure information through the online self-tracker in just a few minutes for one of 11 designated hazardous substances, such as asbestos, lead, mercury and silica. Workers can record details such as how their exposure occurred and what protective measures were in place, such as ventilation, training or personal protective equipment. Each submission generates a confirmation email and a record that can be downloaded. Occupational illnesses are often underreported or difficult to diagnose due to long latency periods between exposure and the onset of symptoms. By giving workers the tools to track their own exposures over the course of their careers, the registry can also support medical assessments if symptoms arise years later, the government said. Govt. of Ontario

British Columbia’s mining industry expects to need 5,000 more new workers over the next 10 years, with planned new mines and expansions, said Michael Goehring, CEO of the Mining Association of B.C. The province’s mining sector currently employees about 29,000 people, according to the B.C. Statistics agency. However, Goehring noted that the industry’s workforce is also rapidly aging, so the worry is mining companies could need as many as 35,000 new workers to fill the gap in the next decade. There are 120 careers within mining, said Jill Budell, executive director of the industry-backed Centre for Training Excellence in Mining. Some of those careers require university, college or trades training, but most are so-called occupational roles, such as heavy equipment or mining machine operation, which are still technical jobs but mostly involve training on site.  B.C. will need a “modular approach” that can be adapted and ramped up as demands crop up region by region and as new mines open, to augment the “steady state” of education and training that serves the mining sector, Budell said. Vancouver Sun

******************************************************************************************************************************

Five ways to make the academic workplace happier and healthier

Despite attempts by many universities to improve workplace culture in higher education by introducing codes of conduct and leadership training, the system remains strongly hierarchical, rewarding research output over respectful behaviour, according to an article in Nature.

This could drive future generations of researchers to choose industry over academia,

Ferhan G. Sağın, chair of the Federation of European Biochemical Societies Education and Training Committee and a medical biochemist at Ege University in İzmir, Turkey, and Robert A. Harris, Dean of Doctoral Education at the Karolinska Institutet, Sweden, write in the article.

People at the bottom of the hierarchy are often invisible to their institutions; at the top, a person’s publication record can act as a shield for bad behaviour, they said. Those in charge of people’s work contracts, funding, authorship attribution and reference letters can easily forget how vulnerable other people’s positions can be.

The authors asked their Academic Think Tank colleagues (in North America, Europe and Asia) to reflect on what needs to improve the most. The same issues kept surfacing: supervisors who see students as labour, not as learners; early-career researchers who are afraid to report abuse or harassment; and institutions that tolerate workplace toxicity in exchange for prestige.

Here are five things the authors think  must become standard practice in academia:

• Mandatory leadership training:

Some professors are promoted for their research output, not for their ability to manage people. This has to change. Every leadership role should include mandatory training in supervision, leadership and communication, with regular refreshers and feedback mechanisms that embrace diverse perspectives, such as the 360-degree method.

Some universities require academics to attend an introductory doctoral supervisor course before they can act as principal supervisors, and offer follow-up leadership courses for people managing research groups.

• Anonymous reporting systems that work:

Reporting mechanisms must be followed up with real action to ensure that people can trust them. A reporting system that doesn’t work is one in which complaints disappear, nothing is documented, there is no feedback to the person who made the report and problematic behaviour patterns never reach leadership teams. Institutions should publish anonymized data to build transparency.

At the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, all graduating PhD students are invited to complete an anonymous survey, and the results are summarized in public reports that highlight the strengths and problem areas of the doctoral environment.

• Cultural climate audits:

Departments should be internally assessed regularly by the university on how inclusive, respectful and equitable they are – not just on financial and research metrics used to estimate productivity.

Regular “cultural climate” audits are investigations into an organization’s attitudes and common behaviours. They can include anonymous surveys on feelings of belonging, safety, discrimination and respect; focus groups; and open comment channels.

Many universities now conduct campus-wide diversity and inclusion surveys and publish the results alongside related action plans.

For example, the University of Chicago in Illinois ran a climate survey on sexual misconduct and consolidated two policies into a single, university-wide misconduct policy. It used this opportunity to create a new disciplinary committee, appoint an associate dean for disciplinary affairs and expand prevention training and campus-wide dialogues.

The University of New Haven in West Haven, Connecticut, used its Campus Climate Survey data to develop department-level diversity, equity and inclusion dashboards that benchmark progress and guide interventions.

• Well-being as a measure of success:

Burnout, staff turnover and people’s mental health are not side issues: they are indicators of the health of an institution. We need to treat them as seriously as we treat grant income or publication numbers. That means tracking well-being, workload, psychological safety and attrition – and acting on the data.

Funders and policymakers can reinforce data-acquisition efforts by requiring institutions to show how they support staff and student wellbeing as part of grant and accreditation processes.

The authors said they recognize that tying funding or evaluation directly to well-being metrics is controversial. Metrics can be gamed, and there is a risk that institutions will do the bare minimum to tick a box.

“But the data should not be ignored. The challenge will be to use well-being indicators as prompts for conversation and change – not as another simple metric to chase.”

• Accountability beyond the CV:

Institutions must be willing to remove individuals from leadership roles, regardless of their academic reputation. Procedures for investigating allegations of bullying, harassment and other misconduct need to be independent, transparent and centred around people’s experiences. Seniority should never be a shield against consequences.

This is not just about individuals behaving badly. It is about the systems that are in place and a culture at institutions that allows harm to persist because protecting prestige is prioritized over people.

“Silence has protected those at the top of the academic hierarchy for too long,” the authors said. “We think that the future of higher education depends on breaking that silence. Harmful academic culture needs to be countered with courage, accountability and empathy.” Nature

******************************************************************************************************************************

Turning Canada’s self-employment surge into new businesses could help reverse declining entrepreneurship levels and drive economic growth

Self-employment is having a resurgence in Canada and could help reverse declining entrepreneurship levels and drive economic growth, according to a study by the Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC).

After a pandemic-era decline, self-employment rebounded in 2024, with about 70,000 Canadians joining the ranks. Today, two million Canadians work for themselves, and nearly four in 10 intend to hire or invest in the coming year.

This hiring intention matters, BDC said. Close to half of new micro-businesses are launched by former solo operators who make their first hire. At scale, this transition could contribute about 213,000 business openings in one year and add up to 0.8 percent to GDP – about $24 billion.

New tools – particularly accessible AI – can help solo operators boost productivity, systematize operations, and accelerate the path to a first hire.

BDC’s Entrepreneurial Spark of Canada’s Self-Employed report is based on an online survey of 851 self-employed workers and 654 micro-business owners or decision-makers (businesses with less than five employees), all members of Sago’s online panel. The Sago panel is a research community used by companies to gather consumer, business-to-business, and health care insights.

“Canada’s self‑employed are a hidden engine of growth,” said Pierre Cléroux, vice‑president, research and chief economist at BDC. “With the right support, a one-person business can hire, scale into a small- or medium-sized enterprise (and, over time, become part of the next generation of ownership transitions.”

The proportion of individuals in Canada’s labour market who become new employers each year has been decreasing in Canada for decades, BDC noted.

In 2023, it reached a historic low, with only 0.11 percent of the labour force opening new businesses. In 2024, it remained near this record low at 0.13 percent.

“To revitalize entrepreneurial activity, we need more entrepreneurs, and self-employment is one promising avenue,” BDC said.

The report’s key findings are:

• Scale and intent: Two million self‑employed Canadians now work for themselves; nearly 40 percent plan to grow through hiring or investment in the next year.
• Pivotal moment: Hiring a first employee is the turning point – self‑employment becomes employer entrepreneurship.
• Economic role: Self‑employment helps buffer the labour market during periods of rising unemployment, and can be a significant wealth creator.
• Financing barriers: 73 percent of self-employed Canadians rely on personal funds (versus 55 percent of micro‑businesses).
• Policy payoff: Targeted support can raise new‑business survival by up to 20 percentage points within three to five years.

“Think of self-employment as the launch pad in a continuum of SME creation,” Cléroux said. “Our recent study on business transfers shows the other side of this continuum – thousands of SMEs changing hands in the years ahead. Strengthening the front end – where solo operators become employers – builds more resilient businesses, more jobs and better succession outcomes.”

The report also highlights persistent challenges, including client acquisition and cash-flow management.

These challenges are compounded by limited access to financing: The vast majority of self-employed Canadians (73 percent) rely on personal funds, and only 39 percent have a commercial bank account, compared with 52 percent of micro-businesses.

BDC said its research underscores the importance of supporting self-employed Canadians as they scale up. Increased support can boost survival rates of new businesses by 20 percentage points in the first three to five years.

1. The report offered five tips for the self-employed for building their workforce:
   Understand your financial needs and resources. It is crucial to evaluate your financial situation and explore various financing options to support your growth. Consider seeking a financial partner experienced in commercial banking. Adding a line of credit can help absorb fluctuations and ensure timely payments.
2. Develop a recruitment and onboarding strategy. Develop a comprehensive strategy for recruiting, onboarding and managing employees. This involves understanding employment laws, creating detailed job descriptions, and setting up efficient payroll systems – focusing on the long-term benefits is key.
3. Seek external assistance. External assistance is vital for growth, especially in areas like sales, marketing, business strategy and financial management. Consider seeking mentorship, joining business networks or hiring consultants to help navigate the complexities of scaling your business.
4. Leverage digital tools and AI. Digital tools can simplify various aspects of your business, from billing and communication to marketing and project management. Use software for accounting, customer relationship management and other business operations to streamline processes and improve efficiency.
5. Set aside money for taxes. When you’re self-employed, it’s your responsibility to set aside and pay income taxes directly to the government. Set up a separate business banking account to automatically allocate a portion of your earnings for tax liabilities. This will help you avoid financial surprises and ensure compliance with tax regulations.

“Turning self-employment into entrepreneurship is critical,” Cléroux said. “Every new employer strengthens Canada’s economic fabric. Targeted support at the first‑hire stage can improve survival, unlock productivity, and help rebuild Canada’s business base.” BDC

*****************************************************************************************************************************

Despite “brain drain” concerns, most health degree graduates in Canada remained in the country three years after graduating: Statistics Canada

The three-year retention rate (those still in Canada) for health degree graduates was higher than the overall average across all degree fields for both domestic (95 percent versus 92 percent overall) and international (68 percent versus 58 percent) graduates, according to a Statistics Canada (StatsCan) study.

When examining regional retention, the authors found that fewer Canadian graduates in the Atlantic provinces and Alberta remained in their province of graduation three years later, compared with those in Saskatchewan, British Columbia, and Ontario.

While national retention of health care workers is crucial for the country, retaining health degree graduates within the regions where they trained is viewed as equally essential for tackling regional shortages in the health care workforce, StatsCan noted.

“Retaining health graduates in their province of study helps increase the local supply of health care professionals to the region. At the same time, interprovincial migration of health graduates can alleviate shortages in regions that do not supply enough health care workers to meet their needs.”

The study’s co-authors are Youjin Choi and Feng Hou, both with the Economic and Social Analysis and Modelling Division, Analytical Studies and Modelling Branch, at StatsCan.

For their study, they examined T1 Family File (T1FF) data and data from the Postsecondary Student Information System.

They grouped fields of study into four categories: medicine, dentistry and optometry; nursing; pharmacy and related programs; and health care, not elsewhere classified.

Among Canadians who graduated from 2015 to 2021, 96 percent of graduates from medicine, dentistry and optometry programs and nursing programs, and 97 percent of graduates from pharmacy and related programs, filed tax returns three years after graduation.

These retention rates were higher than the average for graduates from all fields of study (91 percent).

Canadian doctoral degree graduates (92 percent) were less likely to file tax returns in Canada than graduates from bachelor’s and master’s degree programs (95 percent).

Tax filing rates varied narrowly across the provinces of study, ranging from 94 percent in Ontario to 97 percent in Quebec and Prince Edward Island.

Wider variations in tax filing rates were observed among international students. Among the 2015-to-2021 cohort, international graduates from pharmacy and related programs (64 percent) were more likely to remain in Canada three years after graduation than those from medicine, dentistry and optometry (44 percent) and nursing (52 percent) programs

International graduates’ tax filing rates varied greatly by province, ranging from 29 percent in Alberta to 86 percent in Manitoba.

“The analysis of national retention among health degree program graduates revealed that most Canadian graduates remained in Canada after completing their studies,” authors Choi and Hou said.

When regional retention rates were disaggregated by field of study among Canadians who graduated from 2015 to 2019, graduates from medicine, dentistry and optometry programs (75 percent) had lower regional retention rates than graduates from other health fields – nursing (87 percent) and pharmacy and related programs (89 percent).

International graduates showed similar patterns in retention rates by program, but at lower levels (56 percent for medicine, dentistry and optometry; 69 percent for nursing; and 80 percent for pharmacy and related programs).

For Canadian graduates who completed medicine, dentistry and optometry programs from 2010 to 2019, Ontario was the top destination among those who studied in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, and Quebec and left their province of study.

For those from Quebec, 16 percent moved to other regions, including seven percent who headed to Ontario.

Among graduates from the Western provinces, Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia were the most popular destinations.

In Ontario, 21 percent of graduates moved to other regions, including six percent to Alberta and seven percent to British Columbia.

For nursing graduates, New Brunswick stood out with a low regional retention rate of 51 percent, as 37 percent of graduates moved to Ontario. There were no noticeable standout destination regions for other provinces.

The proportion of Canadian graduates in the 2010-to-2019 cohort who studied in their home province was 83 percent for medicine, dentistry and optometry programs; 85 percent for nursing programs; and 88 percent for pharmacy programs

Among Canadians who completed medicine, dentistry and optometry programs, the majority of graduates who left their study province studied in their home province and left the province after graduation (e.g. 83 percent in British Columbia).

One exception was Nova Scotia, where 45 percent of Canadian graduates from medicine, dentistry and optometry programs were out-of-province students. In this province, the majority of leavers (60 percent) came from other regions, including 33 percent who returned to their home province after graduation and 27 percent who moved to a third region that was neither their province of study nor their home province.

While a province may lose some health graduates through out-migration, it can also gain others through in-migration, Stats Can said. The relative size of these two flows determines whether a province experiences a net gain or loss in the exchange.

For the fields of medicine, dentistry and optometry, Quebec had the largest net loss, of five percentage points.

With a larger volume of in-migration, Ontario had a smaller net loss (two percentage points) than Quebec.

Alberta and British Columbia had a small net gain (one percentage point). Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and the territories experienced a net gain only because they did not have any graduates in these fields.

Alberta accounted for 16 percent of Canadian graduates in the field of nursing, but 13 percent of nursing graduates lived in the province three years after graduation, leading to a net loss of three percentage points. New Brunswick also experienced a net loss (two percentage points).

For pharmacy and related programs, Nova Scotia had the largest net loss of graduates (three percentage points), followed by Saskatchewan (two percentage points).

New Brunswick had a net gain of graduates (two percentage points) because it did not offer these programs in its postsecondary education system. British Columbia had a net gain (one percentage point).

“Despite concerns about the brain drain of health care workers to other countries, particularly the United States, retention of Canadian graduates from health degree programs within Canada was higher than the average for all Canadian graduates,” Choi and Feng Hou noted.

Canadian graduates showed small variations in national retention across different educational characteristics. International graduates had larger variations, but they accounted for a small portion of health degree graduates in Canada.

Some degree of regional migration was observed among health graduates, varying by field of study, country of citizenship and province of study.

Graduates from medicine, dentistry and optometry programs had lower regional retention rates than graduates from nursing and other health fields.

Permanent residents were more likely than Canadian citizens to leave their province of study. Some health graduates who left their province of study relocated to neighbouring provinces, while others moved to larger provinces, such as Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia.

“Their relocation may be motivated by the pursuit of better employment or training opportunities,” Choi and Feng Hou said.

“Overall, regional variations in net gains and losses of health graduates three years after graduation were small.” Statistics Canada

****************************************************************************************************************************

The University of Northern British Columbia (UNBC) will launch the Licensed Practical Nurses (LPN)  accelerated learning pathway this Fall to provide licensed practical nurses a quicker transition to a career as registered nurses. The new LPN Pathway will be part of the current two-year Northern Baccalaureate Nursing Program in the UNBC School of Nursing. The accelerated program will consist of five consecutive semesters of full-time study and placements in northern communities, and will lead to a Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree. This pathway is offered in a combined cohort model at both the Fort St John and Prince George campuses. The new pathway will use seats already allocated to the NBNP program, with an ongoing goal of filling half with LPN Pathway students. UNBC

Red Deer Polytechnic and NOVA Chemicals announced the Central Alberta Trades Strategy to address demand for skilled trades professionals while reducing barriers to education. The strategy proposes several core initiatives that would expand access to skilled trades training, including regional training hubs and satellite access points; modular and stackable credentials; expanded integrated work-based learning; pilot projects and innovation labs; and coordinated ecosystem governance across postsecondary institutions, employers, K–12 schools, and municipalities. Developed through extensive cross‑sector collaboration led by Red Deer Polytechnic and NOVA Chemicals' Joffre Site, the strategy brings together educators, employers, workforce organizations and community partners to respond to growing demand for skilled trades professionals, while addressing long‑standing barriers facing learners and employers alike. Red Deer Polytechnic

More than half of men (55 percent) have considered a career in the skilled trades, compared with 67 percent of women who have not, according to an annual survey and report by London, Ont.-based Classic Fire + Life Safety, which offers fire and life safety solutions. Seventy-seven percent of women surveyed for the Measuring Up the Trades 2025 report said they would encourage their children or others to pursue a career in the trades. The disconnect appears to be awareness and access, the company said:

• Just 24 percent of women are familiar, for example, with careers such as fire alarm technician and sprinkler fitter.
• Only nine percent said they know where to begin if they or someone they know wanted to start a career in the trades.

When asked why they considered a career in skilled trades, more respondents (both men and women) indicated an appreciation for job security (38 percent in 2025 versus 29 percent in 2024), and overall, more Canadians have strongly considered a career in the skilled trades (18 percent in 2025 compared to 15 percent in 2024). More than half of respondents (52 percent) said they think more highly of the trades now that they did a few years ago. When asked about benefits of a career in skilled trades, 50 percent cited the appeal of hands-on work, 48 percent said trades offer strong earning potential, 38 percent pointed to job security, and 26 percent said trades provide good opportunities to start a small business. Classic Fire + Safety.

SECTOR SIGNALS: Focus on the agricultural sector

Canada needs to overhaul its structures for investing in the agri-food sector to incentivize a potential $13-billion opportunity

Canada’s agri-food startups present a $13-billion investment opportunity but the agri-food sector is undercapitalized by domestic growth funds, according to a report by RBC Thought Leadership.

Capital flows in growing agri-food companies could help Ottawa achieve its target of unlocking $1 trillion in investment by 2030 to power economic growth, the report said.

However, the sector accounts for only two percent of government-backed growth, venture and infrastructure funds at the federal level, and brought in an estimated four percent of total growth funds invested in Canada over the past five years.

Canada has one of the world’s most productive agricultural systems, globally competitive farmers, and is a net exporter of value-added agriculture and food products, the report noted.

Yet, the country is steadily losing its position as a preferred place to start, scale and retain agri-food startups. “That’s because the pipeline for investment and innovation has structural gaps and barriers, from seed to maturity.”

Agri-food companies across market segments start to face Canada’s growth capital challenge of fragmented and shallow domestic funds when seeking to raise $15 million in capital or more.

And across economic sectors, there is a significant gap in capital for growth, with domestic venture firms not positioned to inject more than $30 million. 

The most obvious challenge is the growth-stage, the report said. The value of available capital in Canada in growth stages falls roughly 37 percent compared to the venture stage where the startups are more supported by venture firms and incubators.

Support from government at the early stages of growth comes largely from incubators, accelerators, cost-share and R&D programs, which are important pieces of Canada’s agri-food innovation pipeline.

Yet, this concentration and program delivery often results in Canada’s emerging leaders in agri-food being described as “grant-entrepreneurs” who are forced to spend excessive time on finding and writing applications and meeting reporting requirements instead of building investor-ready businesses, the report said.

Another challenge with government capital is that economy-wide pools of funds like the Canada Growth Fund do not intentionally restrict agri-food, but the sector often does not fit neatly within investment criteria for several reasons, including project scales, geographical dispersion of production and projects, and the definitions of innovation or clean technology. 

Unlike the U.S., where a “fail fast, iterate, scale” culture fuels deal activity and risk appetite, Canadian investors are generally more risk-averse, particularly beyond seed stage, which discourages bold bets, the report said. This shows up in the number of new Canadian companies seeking funding rounds.

Traditional investor preferences toward, for example, information technology over agri-food innovation, which is often perceived as lower-growth and lower-return, limit participation by generalist venture firms and institutional investors. This reinforces narrow capital pools for late-stage agri-food deals.

“The absence of a Canadian agri-food unicorn – defined as a privately held startup valued at more than $1 billion – is a macro signal that Canada does not have an ecosystem that can propel promising companies.”

Peers like the Netherlands, Germany, and Australia all have unicorns – and heavy hitters like the U.S., India, and China have a stable-full of unicorns.

Venture and institutional funds have attempted to flow capital into the sector, but fragmented governance across provinces and sector fit for funds have pushed agri-food to the sidelines of mainstream approaches to deploying growth capital, the report noted.

Domestic agri-food companies got a piece of the growth capital boom – $10.5 billion – between 2015 and 2021, according to the report.

But investments across sectors have dwindled. Today, growth investment in Canadian agri-food is lower than it was a decade ago, with values down 32 percent and deals by 29 percent.

“The basic mechanics of growth for an agri-food company can cut the sector out of fund priorities,” the report said.

Despite the upfront cost to commercialize and expand, growth in the industry runs counter to the assumption that momentum is not building for value-add processing in Canada.

Over the past decade, year-over-year revenue growth in agri-food manufacturing has averaged 5.9 percent, compared to the average in manufacturing of 3.6 percent.

To align investment with Canada’s growth and sovereignty ambitions, funds like the $1-billion Venture and Growth Capital Initiative announced in the 2025 federal budget could establish agri-food “lanes” with tailored tools, the report said. The budget identified agri-food as one of three sectors that Canada enjoys a strategic global advantage.

If Canada were to align its growth capital investment in agri-food with the industry’s contribution to GDP as a benchmark to build from, it would require an estimated $13 billion from now until 2030 – a 36-percent boost in investment relative to the past five years, according to the report.

Other nations – including Finland, Japan, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE)– are explicitly linking food security, productivity and industrial policy through coordinated growth capital strategies, the study pointed out. The U.S. captured 33 percent of global agri-food investments over the past three years.

To achieve food security goals, the UAE launched the Agri-Food Growth and Water Abundance cluster with the ambition to attract $48 billion by 2045 specifically for their agriculture, food and water sectors.

Finland, despite having just 2.3 million hectares of farmland – 3.7 percent of Canada’s farmland mass is emerging as an innovation hub following a similar government-backed approach that the Netherlands and Denmark have taken to crowd-in private investment for the sector.

Finland’s ecosystem is characterized by strong public-private collaboration, deep expertise in cold-climate agriculture and aquaculture, and a focus on export-oriented, high-technology solutions.

The opportunity for Canadian investors and innovators – public and private – is to better calibrate and scale capital and businesses to anchor economic value domestically, the report said.

This starts at the idea stage, improving universities’ weakening role in innovation and reversing trends in business outsourced investments to universities for agri-food R&D, which have fallen 64 percent in the past five years, the study said.

Without immediate action, Canada risks capping agri-food sector’s growth potential by not hosting more value-add processing domestically, the report warned.

Canada risks hollowing out the agri-food innovation ecosystem as companies and talent look to other countries, including Australia, Japan and Germany, which are growing their investment in R&D and commercialization.

And the country risks irrelevance in the era of disruptive technologies – including AI-driven decision tools, gene editing, biological inputs, automation, robotics, and novel food processing – that will shape productivity gains in the decades ahead.

The study suggests five ideas for growing the Canadian agri-food sector:

• Structure intellectual property agreements and academic incentive models to reward commercialization.

Incentivizing commercialization requires exploring approaches beyond rewarding researchers via grants that measure success based on peer-reviewed publications and promotions dependent on traditional academic-research-services model.

Agri-food faculties across Canada could consider strengthening their promotion of academic-entrepreneur pathways for researchers – like Dalhousie University’s Agriculture Faculty offers – and create structured opportunities for universities and the private sector to negotiate IP ownership to support commercialization.

This could include enabling co-design partnerships among institutions and companies, providing clearer conflict-of-interest guidance, and embedding commercialization activity into promotion and tenure criteria, particularly in applied sciences and engineering disciplines.

• Harness AI to steward early growth and engagement through a public-private concierge.

To solve early-stage roadblocks, build an AI-powered concierge platform within an existing national organization with sector credibility and institutional knowledge that allows startups to navigate public and private opportunities in one place, building upon existing tools like AgPal.

• Engage agri-food experts to translate sector complexity into investment logic for the generalist investor.

If the sector wants outsiders to engage, existing agri-food leaders and investors in Canada need to offer more intentional platforms for non-agri-food investors to build familiarity, context, and conviction.

A starting point could be targeted national roundtables for each market segment led by select agri-food investment leaders for domestic and international generalist investors to start building connections, share sector-specific investment theses, and compare notes on market segment profiles, timelines and exit pathways.

Opportunities to embed agri-food expertise directly into investment decision-making could include:

• Investment committees and advisory panels that upgrade their agri-food expertise by including agri-food operators, processors, and sector investors.

• Fund managers of investment firms participating in federal programs like VCCI must have a team with prior agri-food investing experience or a formal advisory relationship with sector experts.
• Governments should reorient Canada’s growth infrastructure and venture funds to align with the country’s strategic advantages, including agri-food.

Although agri-food is cited as one of Canada’s key strategic advantages, government investment programs – at the provincial and federal level – are often not accessible to growing agri-food companies because they are not fit for purpose for the types of innovation, asset intensity, and scaling timelines typical of the sector. This misalignment leaves significant agri-food potential unleveraged.

Rather than creating entirely new programs, existing funds could establish agri-food lanes with tailored tools. One option is to explore a growth-stage agri-food mandate within VCCI or its successor under the $1-billion Venture and Growth Capital Initiative that was announced in the 2025 federal budget.

There is an opportunity to adjust eligibility rules for federal and provincial government funds to reflect how agri-food companies scale as they raise growth capital, making way for high-quality agri-food companies:

• Accepting asset-heavy business models that have robust business and risk management plans (e.g., processing facilities, fermentation tanks, cold storage, pilot plants).
• Recognizing process innovation, novel ingredients, yield improvement and cost reduction as legitimate innovation – not just software or IP-only advances.
• Allowing longer commercialization timelines (seven to 10 years versus three to five), consistent with regulatory, construction and market adoption realities.

• Canada needs to ignite growth in agri-food value-add through tools that mitigate revenue uncertainty.

Expanding the Canadian agri-food value chain, requires public and private investors to be deploying blended capital structures that reflect agri-food economics.

This includes considering tools to mitigate risks in capital deployment for high-impact projects that address a clear growth opportunity for Canada’s agri-food sector such as:

• Subordinated or patient capital alongside private equity.
• Government first-loss guarantees to de-risk infrastructure projects.
• Revenue-linked instruments or convertible structures suited to variable margins.
• Support for offtake-linked financing when buyer commitments are conditional but there is clear demand.

“There is a mismatch between the framing of Canada’s agri-food sector as a superpower and its strategic advantages with the actual scale and focus of investments domestically,” the study said.

“Transforming Canada into an agri-food superpower requires a targeted, nimble approach to capital and growth that navigates the sector’s restraints and fulfills its true potential.” RBC

*****************************************************************************************************************************

Canada needs a comprehensive national agricultural strategy with clear priorities, deliverables and performance measures

Canada needs a comprehensive national agriculture strategy, according to a summary report of a  roundtable convened by the Canada West Foundation.

The roundtable, sponsored by Farm Credit Canada and Osler, Oskin and Harcourt LLP, looked at the biggest opportunities and challenges for increasing Canada’s agri-food production, processing and net exports.

Participants agreed that a national strategy must articulate clear priorities, deliverables and performance measures.

The discussion underscored the interconnected nature of the Canadian agri-food system and the need to treat agriculture as a national economic priority.

Participants emphasized that progress and evolution depend on coordinated action across four interrelated themes:

• On-farm investment.
• Market and product diversification.
•  
• Technology and innovation.

Strategic alignment among these themes would support modernization, expansion and diversification for the sector, reduce barriers and enable the sector to move toward shared goals and objectives supported by measurable indicators of progress.

With ongoing advancements in ag-technology, the definition of a “farmer” is evolving from a small-scale producer to larger-scale entrepreneur. This transition creates opportunities to revisit farm investment programs and look at ways they could be updated or improved to be more accessible to the modern “farmer.”

Most on-farm capital originates with farmers who are managing limited cash flow due to debt loads as financing terms have moved from five to between seven and 10 years, with costlier inputs.

Farmers may only have a career spanning 45 years to 50 years, so each year needs to be as productive as possible. When product cannot move through the value chain, farmers not only lose a year of investment but also the return on that investment through sales.

Most federal investment in infrastructure focuses on large-scale projects valued at more than $150 million, and on-farm infrastructure typically costs quite a bit less.

The roundtable participants recognized that there needs to be more opportunities for smaller-scale investments at the federal level.

A specific example of this is the lack of storage capacity, such as bins for grains and oilseeds. While farmers harvest in the fall, market demand may not peak until the spring. To make the most profits possible, additional capacity to store products is essential.

Irrigation and drainage projects were also identified as areas where additional investments could be made to support the sector.

Roundtable participants also noted that more support would be needed to encourage a mindset shift to see agriculture as a commercial enterprise.

Crown and private programs are needed to support more farmers in reaching $1 million or more in revenue and encourage those with more than $1 million to reach $2 million to $5 million in revenues.

“These programs also would help to generate new goals for farmers and the sector as they look to expand or diversify production to reach profit milestones,” according to the report.

Participants suggested that agriculture could draw lessons from the early stages of energy project development, particularly in co-investment models that enable shared infrastructure and de-risk private capital.

There is now an opportunity to examine the best practices used in the energy sector, to determine if any could be replicated to build shared infrastructure such as storage facilities.

Canada’s agricultural exports remain heavily weighted toward unprocessed commodities, rather than processed, manufactured foods.

For commodity production, farmers are looking for “the next canola.” Canola is oftentimes the most profitable crop because of the demand, access to multiple markets, and the ability to sell in both raw and processed forms.

Lentil crops were highlighted as having comparable potential to canola, given that Canada ranks among the top global producers of lentils.

For value-add processing and manufacturing, participants discussed ingredient processing as an area for potential development alongside end-product food and beverage manufacturing. Participants noted that companies are looking at other countries with the necessary infrastructure where processing and manufacturing capacity can be built quickly to capitalize on market opportunities.

“If Canada cannot create an environment that supports domestic processing, companies will continue to look abroad,” the report said.

Barriers to value-add production include investment attraction and regulatory delays.

When products are made in Canada, interprovincial export becomes a challenge as companies need to meet the Safe Foods for Canadians Act (SFCA) requirements, which is the same threshold for exporting internationally.

Meeting SFCA standards is costly and time consuming, as processors need to operate in federally approved and inspected facilities and meet federal packaging and traceability standards.

These regulations prevent companies from operating within one, unified Canadian market and make export more attractive than provincial trade as they have reached the threshold for both.

Participants emphasized the need for longer-term market intelligence that identifies emerging opportunities for both raw and processed products, alongside the infrastructure and trade pathways required to reach them.

The discussion on infrastructure capacity focused on time, labour and whether infrastructure is being fully utilized and properly sequenced to maximize timing of shipments for profit and to reduce bottlenecks along the supply chain.

The bottlenecks discussed at the roundtable include regulatory delays, labour challenges, and aging infrastructure.

Those at the roundtable noted that it can take much longer to approve and build additional infrastructure to increase port or rail capacity in Canada than it does in the other countries, such as the United States. Those countries, which are quicker to adapt to emerging industry needs, may divert capital investment in infrastructure away from Canada.

Port automation could help improve port efficiency and address capacity challenges as workforce demographics shift in the future. However, increased automation is a real concern for workers and has led to labour action at ports in recent years, which has stalled exports.

Moving forward, port governance and decision making should include engagement with representatives from the agriculture sector to ensure sectoral needs are considered as trade patterns and partners evolve, the report said.

Concerns were raised about declining public investment in agricultural research and a growing disconnect between research priorities and on-farm needs. This decline saw industry research partnerships move to Australia and Europe where they have investment to grow from startup to commercialization.

The investment gap is particularly prominent when startups move out of the incubator stage but are not quite ready for venture capital investment. Public funds could help fill the gap, but the right approach should be developed in partnership with industry.

There is also a disconnect with what industry needs and the research that is currently underway. On-farm problems are not necessarily driving research and determining what could be commercialized.

From the view of participants, researchers are oftentimes disconnected from on-farm challenges and solving for perceived or theoretical problems.

Investments in the Canadian agricultural sector have generally been quite targeted and have not been focused on benefiting the sector as a whole. In contrast, some other countries employ a more holistic, industry-wide approach.

Germany’s Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft organization was cited as an example of how an applied research institute can support agriculture research from initial development to scale. The organization supports the work of 13 institutes “to find solutions along the entire value chain including raw materials, processing, food, production protection and analytics, circular economy and sustainability, frameworks and regulations, value networks and markets and business models.”

Roundtable participants also saw the need to ensure research does not sit on the shelf and suggested that a similar Canadian entity like the one in Germany could help drive adoption and support integration of technology and innovation into the national agriculture conversation to strategically align efforts on a national level.

“Geopolitics are destabilizing Canada’s trade relationships with our two largest trading partners, the United States and China, and the agricultural sector is caught on the front lines,” the report noted.

Producers and processors need support in identifying where the long-term export opportunities are at the commodity level for both raw and processed exports.

Statistics Canada and other organizations track a whole host of agricultural related data, and the roundtable participants want to use that data to inform key measures and targets and rethink the ways in which industry communicates technical information to non-technical audiences.

This development of sector goals and measures would have a twofold purpose:

1. It will allow for a more cohesive and comprehensive understanding of how the different aspects of the system are functioning together and supporting the overall goals of the agricultural sector.
2. It will help Canadians develop a better understanding of agriculture and how things like infrastructure and technology are also intrinsically connected to the success of the sector.

Public and private investments are needed across the system to support necessary improvements to the current system while also building additional capacity and innovation for the future.

The roundtable highlighted some areas of immediate need:

• On-farm storage capacity.
• Irrigation and drainage systems, and leveraging financing tools such as the Canada Infrastructure Bank to advance projects.
• Path forward for Second Narrows Bridge, which is a single-track railway line and a high risk for bottlenecks. Also, the infrastructure is aging and wasn’t built to meet current demands and weight loads or mitigate earthquake risk.
• Post-incubator, pre-venture capital stage supports.
• Creation of an institute to identify and align the system components.

Canada possesses significant agricultural potential, but legacy structures, regulatory fragmentation, aging infrastructure and heightened geopolitical trade risks are constraining the sector’s growth and competitiveness, the report concluded.

“A new national strategy can align industry, governments and capital around shared priorities and measurable outcomes. A national agriculture strategy offers a pathway to that alignment and would allow Canada to emerge as a global agriculture leader.” Canada West Foundation

********************************************************************************************************************************

The Government of British Columbia’s On-Farm Technology Adoption Program is offering $2.5 million in B.C. and federal funding, through the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership to support agri-tech on B.C. farms to increase production, efficiency and competitiveness. The current program intake open until April 6, 2026. The B.C. On-Farm Technology Adoption Program funds projects that address labour shortages and improves processes for labour-intensive tasks to help farming operations grow, raise, harvest, pack or store food more effectively. Farmers can use the funding to buy new technology, such as equipment and robotics that can operate independently and adapt to the environment around them. This includes: 

• autonomous robotic arms for packing, stacking and wrapping.
• machines for planting seeds and plant material, precisely and repeatably.
• automated harvesters for gathering crops.

The program previously supported companies like Northland Farms in Chilliwack. The business invested in an automated radish harvester that can remove radishes from the soil, cut the tops and put them in bins, reducing manual labour and supporting the expansion of the farm business. In Summerland, Laughing Coyote Orchards Ltd. received help to buy an autonomous vehicle equipped with a mower. The “Burro Grande” vehicle manages the mowing of the orchard throughout the growing season and is set up to transport materials, reducing manual labour for staff. Govt. of B.C.

R$