Prepared for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Supplier name: Pollara Strategic Insights Inc.
Contract number: CW2332519
Contract value: $144,459.93
Award date: September 28, 2023
Delivery date: March 27, 2024
POR Registration Number: 055-23
For more information on this report, please contact Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada at aafc.info.aac@agr.gc.ca.
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.
Date: March 27, 2024
This public opinion research report presents the results of a telephone survey with 1,351 agricultural producers conducted by Pollara Strategic Insights Inc. on behalf of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. The research was conducted from January to February 2024.
This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. For more information on this report, please contact: aafc.info.aac@agr.gr.ca
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, ON K1A 0C5
Catalogue Number: A22-623/2024E-PDF
International Standard Book Number (ISBN): 978-0-660-70277-3
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Number: 13191E
Related publications registration number: POR 055-23
Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Sondage 2023-2024 sur les enjeux stratégiques des producteurs (vague VIII).
Catalogue no. : A22-623/2024F-PDF (Final report, French)
ISBN : 978-0-660-70278-0
© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2024.
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) has been regularly conducting the Strategic Issues Survey with Producers in Canada since 2007. The research is designed to provide insights into the views of producers on current agricultural issues in Canada and on the priorities and policies that affect the agriculture and agri-food sector.
This survey, the eighth wave of tracking, builds on previous waves to show trends over time, and also provides insights on new and evolving areas of interest to AAFC. This year’s research continues to focus on challenges faced by the agriculture industry in Canada, measures taken to ensure and maintain sustainability in farm operations, and programs offered to agricultural producers. In addition, this year’s research studies emerging priorities like food loss, cyber security and mental health, and assesses new initiatives and programs introduced by AAFC.
This research will be used in the development of policies, programs and initiatives, and will inform communications planning, outreach, and engagement with agricultural producers across Canada.
Pollara conducted telephone surveys, using Computer-Aided Telephone Interviewing (CATI) technology, with 1,351 agricultural producers across Canada. To be eligible, respondents had to be at least 18 years old, live in Canada, be at least a joint decision-maker of their farming operation, and have more than $10,000 in farm sales in 2023. The survey was conducted between January 14, 2024, and February 26, 2024, in English and French.
The sample was obtained from Dunn & Bradstreet of agriculture producers. Considering the total population of agricultural producers in Canada, a probability based sample of 1,351 producers would have a margin of error of ±2.7%, 19 times out of 20. The margin of error is larger for subpopulations, and it should be noted that some subgroups have insufficient sample sizes to draw significant observations.
The dataset was weighted by province and farm revenue to ensure the data was representative.
While these issues are prevalent across all provinces, extreme weather events are proving to be a larger business risk to farm operations in Quebec (61%), Alberta (61%), Atlantic Canada (57%), and Manitoba (56%), while cost-based challenges are more likely to be reported in Alberta (38%), Saskatchewan (35%), and British Columbia (34%).
Given the risks that producers are already being exposed to, it is understandable that operational costs (26%) and climate change (19%) are the top issues they feel Canadian agriculture is most likely to face over the next five years.
Though labour shortages are not mentioned often as a top-of-mind business risk (5%), this has been a consistent secondary issue over the years (8% in 2022; 5% in 2018). In 2024, 38% of producers across Canada report experiencing labour market challenges and facing difficulties primarily in recruiting both high-skilled (48%) as well as low-skilled (49%) labour. Labour shortages are a more acute concern among larger farms (56% among farms with revenue of $500K or more), and in Atlantic Canada (62%) British Columbia (50%), Ontario (47%), and to some extent in Quebec (35%) and Alberta (35%). One third (33%) of farms facing labour challenges opted to hire temporary foreign workers (TFWs) as a way to overcome the labour challenge. Most of those who chose not to hire TFWs (67%) found other labour solutions (51%), but confusion over the application process (15%) and difficulty to arrange TFW accommodations (12%) are also barriers to using this program.
This year, new questions on cybersecurity were added, including questions on concern, preparedness, and incidence. Very few farms (9%) have ever experienced a cyber security incident that has disrupted their farming operations. That said, producers express a moderate concern (40%) over being victims of cyberattacks. To this end, only one third (34%) say they are at least somewhat prepared to handle such an incident.
Considering climate change and extreme weather events, production cost, and farm viability challenges impacting Canadian farms, producers are acutely aware of the need to prioritize environmental and sustainability practices on their farms. Most producers consider this a priority and have implemented multiple programs, practices, and measures to this end. The most common actions taken include environmental/sustainability measures (57%), back-up power generation (54%), traceability systems (46%), biosecurity measures (42%), animal welfare measures (40%), and developing an emergency plan (39%).
Half (49%) of producers say that public perceptions about agriculture and food production at least moderately impact the way they operate their farm and the decisions they make. The public influence on operational decision-making has been steadily declining over time; two thirds (67%) in 2018 and six in ten (59%) in 2022 reported being at least moderately impacted by this.
Producers also turn to friends and contacts (78%), agrologists (67%), equipment or supply vendors (59%), industry associates (57%) and other advisors to get advice when making decisions regarding practices to implement on their farms. Social media (41%) and podcasts (26%) also appear as notable sources of information, evenly accessed by producers of all ages.
Most producers are aware of at least one AAFC program or initiative, with a large majority saying they have seen, heard, or read about AgriStability (78%) and AgriInvest (74%), and a slim majority saying they are aware of AgriInsurance (56%) and the Advance Payment Program (51%). The other AAFC programs and initiatives tested are lesser known.
Not surprisingly, the programs and initiatives that are more well-known are also the ones that are most applied to for funding or support. To this end, awareness of AAFC programs is lower in British Columbia than elsewhere in the country, as is uptake of them.
AgriInvest (71%) and AgriStability (67%) are most often applied to, more so by farms with incomes of $500K or more (81% and 69% respectively), and farms in Saskatchewan (85% and 67% respectively), Quebec (76% and 84% respectively), and Alberta (70% and 69% respectively). The primary reason for not applying to AgriStability is because it is not needed (32%). Very few say that it is not beneficial (11%) or is complicated to apply to (9%). Thus, improving awareness of these initiatives and programs among producers is likely to encourage more producers to take advantage of the programs.
About one third (32%) of producers are aware of the Sustainable Canadian Agriculture Partnership and almost similar proportions (38%) are also very or somewhat familiar with the details and services under this initiative. While general awareness is almost similar to levels seen in previous years (34% aware in 2022 and 28% in 2018), familiarity with details is much lower now (50% familiar in 2022 and 47% in 2018). Those aware of the initiative are likely to have a positive (47%) to neutral (34%) view of the program.
This year, awareness of mental health support services was tested. Over half (54%) of producers are aware of these supports and initiatives, however, only 1% report accessing these services.
Canadian producers have mixed views regarding their business’ recent economic performance, as almost equal proportions say their net income has grown (37%), has remained the same (32%), or has decreased (29%) over the last five years. These sentiments are transferred to expectations regarding their farm’s future – where a third (32%) believe their farm’s future will be better off, a slightly lower proportion believe it will be worse off (28%), and the remainder (33%) believe there won’t be any change. Though the economic outlook of Canadian producers has been growing slightly more pessimistic in recent years, given Canadians as a whole are feeling less secure about their economic future than a few years ago, it is notable that the economic outlook of agriculture producers has only worsened marginally (36% better off versus 28% worse off in 2022, and 35% better off versus 28% worse off in 2018).
Producers in Atlantic Canada (44% better off versus 20% worse off), Quebec (41% versus 24%), British Columbia (35% versus 19%) and Manitoba (33% versus 20%) are much more likely to believe their farm operations will be better off in the next five years than worse off. On the other hand, producers in Alberta (25% better off versus 29% worse off), Ontario (33% versus 34%) and Saskatchewan (29% versus 30%) are less likely to feel as optimistic; they are marginally more likely to expect to be worse off than better in the next five years.
Except for oilseed and grain producers who are more likely to believe they will be worse off (32%) than better off (25%), all other producers are more likely to expect their farm operations will improve rather than worsen over the course of the next few years. Notably, dairy, cattle and milk producers are most optimistic about their farm operations (44% better off versus 24% worse off).
Detailed findings are presented in the sections that follow. Overall results for the 2024 survey are presented in the main portion of the narrative and are typically supported by tabular presentation of results and labelled as “2024”. Results are compared, where applicable, with the 2022, 2018, 2017 and 2013 survey findings, and are presented in tables under the headings labelled as per the corresponding year. Where there are significant differences between the provinces, farms with varying incomes and different types of farms, these differences are described in the report as part of the main paragraph or as bulleted text.
Only statistically and substantively significant differences between sub-groups are noted. If differences are not noted in the report, it can be assumed they are either not statistically significant* in their variation from the overall or that the difference was deemed to be substantively too small to be noteworthy.
Results may not total to 100% due to rounding.
*Chi-square and standard t-tests were applied as applicable. Differences
noted were significant at the 95% level.
Supplier name: Pollara Strategic Insights Inc.
Contract number: CW2332519
Contract value: $144,459.93
Award date: September 28, 2023
Delivery date: March 27, 2024
I hereby certify as a representative of Pollara Strategic Insights Inc. that the final deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.
Signed:
Date: March 27, 2024
Dan Arnold, Chief Strategy Officer
Pollara Strategic Insights
The detailed findings of this research project are divided into four sub-sections:
This is followed by a section profiling different types of agricultural producers.
Half (52%) of Canadian producers say that the impacts of climate change, including natural disasters and extreme weather fluctuations, are the main business risk they face. This challenge has been at the forefront since 2013.
Climate change and extreme weather conditions are causing significant business risks to farm operations in Quebec (61%), Alberta (61%), Atlantic Canada (57%), and Manitoba (56%) and somewhat lower but notable risks to farms in Saskatchewan (48%), British Columbia (47%) and Ontario (41%). Produce farms (59%) and oilseed/grain farms (56%) are the most likely to feel climate change poses a business risk to them.
The perceived risk of climate change is understandable given that half (51%) of producers have experienced drought and one quarter (26%) have experienced flooding over the past two years. Less than one in ten (7%) farms have been affected by wildfires over the past two years, despite the growth in wildfires in recent years.
One third (32%) say they are experiencing increases in operational, production and input costs, one quarter (24%) are facing market price fluctuations, and 15% believe the profitability and viability of the farming sector poses a risk to their operations. Additionally, cost-based risks are slightly more likely to be mentioned as pertinent risks by farms with higher income ($500K and over) compared to mid to lower-income farms (under $500K). The converse is true for climate change related risks.
The risks and challenges associated with climate change and operational expenses have been prevalent as top factors since 2013 – in particular, challenges such as increased production and input costs and market fluctuations. It is noteworthy that the likelihood of farms being impacted by diseases and pests has been decreasing over time from 24% in 2013 to 13% in 2024.
Few producers say that changes in government policies (8%) and taxes (6%) pose as a challenge to their farming operations, consistent with the previous wave (6% and 4% respectively).
| 2024 | 2022 | 2018 | 2017 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Climate change impacts/ Natural disasters and extreme weather fluctuations | 52% | 52% | 47% | 48% | 52% |
| Increased operational/production/input costs | 32% | 35% | 23% | 27% | 34% |
| Market price fluctuations/volatility | 24% | 20% | 36% | 34% | 29% |
| Profitability/ Viability of Farming Sector/ Making a Living/ Returns Covering Costs | 15% | 5% | 2% | - | - |
| Diseases or pests | 13% | 12% | 15% | 20% | 24% |
| Interest rates | 9% | 4% | 3% | - | - |
| Changing government policies and programs | 8% | 6% | 10% | 9% | 5% |
| Trade barriers/ Barriers to market access | 6% | 6% | 15% | 11% | 1% |
| Taxes/ Carbon Tax | 6% | 4% | 1% | - | - |
| Labour issues | 5% | - | - | - | - |
| Marketing | 3% | - | - | - | - |
|
Responses in the 2024 wave that are less than 3% are not shown. |
|||||
As mentioned, a significant proportion of producers experienced climate change related emergencies in the past two years: farms in Alberta (78%), Manitoba (76%), Saskatchewan (69%) and British Columbia (57%) report experiencing drought; farms in Atlantic Canada (64%) and Quebec (52%) report experiencing flooding or increases precipitation; 68% of farms in Atlantic Canada experienced hurricanes; and 27% of farms in British Columbia experienced wildfires.
| Total | ATL | QC | ON | MB | SK | AB | BC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Drought | 51% | 33% | 6% | 36% | 76% | 69% | 78% | 57% |
| Flood/Excess precipitation | 26% | 64% | 52% | 32% | 27% | 6% | 13% | 16% |
| Plant disease | 19% | 26% | 18% | 23% | 28% | 20% | 10% | 22% |
| Animal disease | 12% | 2% | 11% | 14% | 17% | 14% | 9% | 10% |
| Wildfire | 7% | 7% | 2% | 4% | 1% | 5% | 9% | 27% |
| Cybersecurity attack | 4% | 4% | 1% | 7% | 2% | 3% | 3% | 8% |
| Hurricane | 3% | 68% | 2% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 1% | - |
| Don’t know/Prefer not to say | 24% | 12% | 35% | 31% | 8% | 21% | 16% | 26% |
Nearly four in ten (38%) farms have experienced labour market challenges in the past two years, slightly up by 3 points from 2022. Farms with an income of $1 million or more are significantly more likely to report this as a challenge (61%), consistent with past findings.
| Total | Farm Income (Under $100k) | Farm Income ($100k to $500k) | Farm Income ($500k to $1 million) | Farm Income ($1 million or more) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | 38% | 32% | 34% | 44% | 61% |
| No | 62% | 68% | 66% | 56% | 38% |
Amidst ongoing labour market pressures in Canada, farms that are experiencing labour shortages are also primarily facing a recruiting challenge – that is, recruiting and attracting both low-skilled or low wage staff (49%) and high-skilled or high wage staff (48%). These challenges are consistent with 2022 findings; however, recruiting high skilled staff was less of a challenge in 2022 (50% for low-skilled/wage and 39% for high-skilled/wage).
| 2024 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|
| Recruiting/attraction of low skilled/low wage staff | 49% | 50% |
| Recruiting/attraction of high skilled/high wage staff | 48% | 39% |
| Recruiting/attraction of staff (general) | 23% | 11% |
| Limited budget to provide competitive wages and benefits | 12% | 8% |
| Retaining existing staff | 9% | 10% |
| Limited ability to provide training for new or existing staff | 4% | 5% |
| Access to staff transportation to farm/operation | 3% | 2% |
| Access to staff housing | 1% | 2% |
| Other | 5% | 4% |
| Because respondents were able to give up to three answers, total mentions may exceed 100%. | ||
In the last year, only 17% of farms chose to hire any temporary foreign workers. However, this figure doubles (33%) among those farms who experienced a labour shortage. Numbers are also significantly higher among farms with an income over $1 million (45%).
| Total | ATL | QC | ON | MB | SK | AB | BC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | 17% | 16% | 22% | 23% | 11% | 6% | 13% | 26% |
| No | 83% | 84% | 78% | 77% | 89% | 94% | 87% | 74% |
Two thirds (67%) of producers who faced labour shortage challenges did not hire temporary foreign workers. The primary reason provided for not hiring was that they did not require additional workers or were able to find Canadian workers (51%). That said, 15% say they found the application process too confusing and 12% found it difficult to arrange for accommodation for the workers.
Cost and difficulty finding accommodations are cited more often in Atlantic Canada as reasons for not hiring temporary foreign workers, partly explaining why Atlantic Canadian producers facing labour shortages are less likely to hire TFWs.
As seen in the previous section, Canadian producers face many operational challenges due to climate change related events. Weather-related events are also the primary cause (80%) for food production losses that have occurred on fruit and vegetables (71%), oilseed and grain (88%), and dairy and milk production (76%) farms over the past two years. All other causes such as plant or animal disease (11%) and pest or wildlife issues (8%) trail far behind.
While extreme weather events were the main cause of food production losses across all provinces, farms in Atlantic Canada also faced losses due to labour shortages (18%) and wildlife (14%). In Ontario (22%) and among produce farms specifically (24%), plant or animal diseases were also a notable cause.
| Total | ATL | QC | ON | MB | SK | AB | BC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weather-related events damaged production | 80% | 93% | 85% | 66% | 82% | 84% | 95% | 70% |
| Plant or animal disease | 11% | 4% | 10% | 22% | 9% | 8% | 3% | 9% |
| Pests or wildlife issues | 8% | 14% | 2% | 9% | 5% | 17% | 5% | 10% |
| Inadequate labour capacity | 4% | 18% | 2% | 9% | 1% | 2% | 2% | 5% |
| Only top 4 reasons are shown. | ||||||||
About one in ten (9%) producers report ever falling victim to cyber incidents in the past. Farms with income of over $1 million (16%) are much more likely to report experiencing a cyber security.
Among those affected, incidents include viruses (19%), bank/credit card fraud (18%), hacking (17%), email scams (17%), and identity theft (12%).
| Total | Farm Income (Under $100k) | Farm Income ($100k to $500k) | Farm Income ($500k to $1 million) | Farm Income ($1 million or more) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | 9% | 5% | 10% | 7% | 16% |
| No | 90% | 94% | 88% | 93% | 84% |
| Don’t know/Prefer not to say | 1% | 1% | 2% | 1% | 0% |
Although a very small number of farms have experienced cyber security incidents, a moderate proportion of producers (40%) say they are very to somewhat concerned about a cyber incident disrupting their farming operations.
| Total | Farm Income (Under $100k) | Farm Income ($100k to $500k) | Farm Income ($500k to $1 million) | Farm Income ($1 million or more) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concerned (Very/Somewhat) | 40% | 36% | 38% | 47% | 55% |
| Not Concerned (Slightly/Not at all) | 59% | 64% | 61% | 51% | 45% |
| Very concerned | 13% | 13% | 11% | 11% | 19% |
| Somewhat concerned | 27% | 23% | 27% | 36% | 36% |
| Slightly concerned | 31% | 28% | 34% | 32% | 31% |
| Not at all concerned | 28% | 36% | 27% | 20% | 15% |
| Don’t know/Prefer not to say | 1% | 0% | 1% | 1% | 0% |
Although four in ten (40%) producers are concerned about cyber incidents, only one third (34%) say they are at least somewhat prepared to handle a cyber incident.
| Total | Farm Income (Under $100k) | Farm Income ($100k to $500k) | Farm Income ($500k to $1 million) | Farm Income ($1 million or more) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prepared (Very/Somewhat) | 34% | 31% | 35% | 35% | 39% |
| Not Prepared (Slightly/Not at all) | 62% | 65% | 61% | 62% | 59% |
| Very prepared | 10% | 10% | 8% | 9% | 11% |
| Somewhat prepared | 24% | 21% | 27% | 26% | 28% |
| Slightly prepared | 27% | 24% | 27% | 34% | 33% |
| Not at all prepared | 35% | 40% | 34% | 28% | 27% |
| Don’t know/Prefer not to say | 4% | 4% | 4% | 3% | 2% |
Given the types of risks faced by producers recently – namely climate change impacts and increases in operational costs – it is not surprising that production costs (26%) and climate change, extreme weather, or natural disaster impacts (19%) are identified as the most important issues Canadian agriculture is likely to face in the next five years. These results are nearly consistent with 2022 results (28% and 21% respectively), while both of these issues are much more prominent now than in 2018 (13% and 11% respectively).
Compared to how they felt about these issues in 2022, producers are somewhat more likely to feel that government intervention (10%, up 5%) and profitability or viability of the farming sector (9%, up 5%) are going to be challenges in the next five years. Conversely, commodity prices (6%) and international trade barriers (3%) which were considered as bigger challenges in 2018 (11% and 16% respectively), are now much less likely to be considered pertinent issues for the future.
Labour shortage concerns remain almost consistent with previous years (7% in 2024 versus 8% in 2022 and 5% in 2018). Labour shortage is more of a continued challenge for producers in Atlantic Canada (17%), Ontario (12%), and British Columbia (12%).
| 2024 | 2022 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Production costs/ Input costs | 26% | 28% | 13% |
| Climate change impacts/ Natural disasters and extreme weather fluctuations | 19% | 21% | 11% |
| Government intervention | 10% | 5% | - |
| Profitability/ Viability of farming sector/ Making a living/ Returns covering costs | 9% | 4% | 5% |
| Labour shortages/ Availability/ Labour (general) | 7% | 8% | 5% |
| Commodity prices/variable prices | 6% | 4% | 11% |
| Carbon tax | 5% | 3% | 3% |
| Environmental concerns | 5% | - | - |
| Trade/ International trade barriers | 3% | 3% | 16% |
| Responses in the 2024 wave that are less than 3% are not shown. | |||
Considering climate change and extreme weather events, production cost, and farm viability challenges impacting Canadian farms, producers are acutely aware of the need to prioritize environmental and sustainability practices on their farms. Over eight in ten (85%) feel this is at least a medium priority, with over four in ten (43%) considering it a high priority.
| 2024 | *2022 | |
|---|---|---|
| High Priority | 43% | 50% |
| Medium Priority | 42% | 41% |
| Low Priority | 14% | 19% |
| Don’t know/Prefer not to say | 1% | - |
| *This question was asked differently in 2022: How much of a priority is it for you to implement environmental sustainability initiatives? Due to the change in question wording, results cannot to be directly compared, however, as the context is similar, tracking data is shown for 2022. | ||
Additionally, most producers report implementing multiple environmental and sustainability measures – the most common being crop rotations (74%). Two thirds of producers say they have reduced pesticide use (64%), have practices in place to improve soil health like a nutrient management plan (63%), are improving carbon storage (63%), and have zero or low-till systems (62%). These are common practices that have been implemented on farms in previous years as well.
Indeed, producers that consider implementing environmental and sustainable practices on their farms as a high priority are more likely to have also implemented multiple programs and practices on their farms. Likewise, farms with higher revenue are more likely to implement these measures and practices; the likelihood of implementing these programs and practices reduces with a decrease in farm revenue.
| 2024 | 2022 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crop rotations* | 74% | 74% | - | - |
| Reduced pesticide use | 64% | 66% | 70% | 67% |
| Nutrient management plan | 63% | 67% | 66% | 60% |
| Improving carbon storage in healthy soils* | 63% | 63% | - | - |
| Zero/low till systems* | 62% | 63% | - | - |
| Environmental stewardship programs | 59% | 67% | 71% | 63% |
| Beneficial manure handling | 56% | 54% | 60% | 52% |
| Improving biodiversity* | 54% | 62% | - | - |
| Reduced fertilizer use | 53% | 62% | - | - |
| Actions to reduce food loss on farm | 51% | 44% | - | - |
| Planting cover crops* | 50% | 60% | - | - |
| Irrigation or water conservation plan / improving water quality | 48% | 41% | 43% | 34% |
| Measures or practices to reduce/eliminate the use of drugs or antibiotics on farm animals | 43% | 48% | 55% | 47% |
| Reducing methane emissions* | 24% | 25% | - | - |
| *These items were asked as a separate question in 2022: Which of the following environmental sustainability measures, programs or practices have you implemented on your farm, if any? Results cannot be directly compared because it was asked as a different question. However, as the items are the same and were asked in a similar context, tracking data is shown for 2018 and 2022 where applicable. | ||||
Just under six in ten producers have taken steps towards enhancing food safety measures (59%) and humane animal welfare practices (58%). Some also publicly talk about how their farm operates (46%) or participate in industry assurance programs (36%).
| 2024 | 2022 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enhanced food safety measures | 59% | 60% | 68% | 59% |
| Humane animal welfare practices | 58% | 59% | 67% | 59% |
| Publicly talking about how your farm operates | 46% | 53% | 60% | - |
| Participation in a sector/industry assurance program | 36% | 38% | 37% | - |
More than half (53%) of producers indicate they have reduced the use of fertilizers, and close to half (45%) say they refrain from using fertilizers altogether. Among those who do use fertilizer, half indicate that having the ability to align practices with 4R certifications (50%) and having access to services that can help decide which practices to implement (49%) would encourage them to implement measures that would help reduce the emissions from fertilizer use.
About one third of producers are concerned about cost implications and believe they would be more likely to reduce emissions from fertilize use if they received government funding (34%), clear return on investment (30%), and carbon offset credits in exchange for actions taken (27%).
| Total | Farm Income (Under $500k) | Farm Income ($500k or more) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ability to align practices with 4R certification opportunities | 50% | 47% | 61% |
| Access to services to decide which practices to use and implement | 49% | 44% | 66% |
| Government funding to help with the costs | 34% | 30% | 46% |
| Clear return on investment | 30% | 33% | 17% |
| Ability to get carbon offset credits in exchange for actions taken | 27% | 25% | 35% |
| Not applicable – do not use fertilizer on farm | 45% | 41% | 59% |
Half (49%) of producers say that what the public thinks has at least a high-to-moderate impact on how they operate, though only 17% say it has a very high or high impact on them.
Compared to previous years, the likelihood of public perception impacting farm operational decisions is trending down. In the 2017 and 2018 waves of the survey, about two thirds (67%) said what the public thinks had a high-to-moderate impact on how they operate. In 2022, this dropped to 59%.
| 2024 | 2022 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High to Moderate Impact (Very high/High/Moderate) | 49% | 59% | 67% | 67% |
| Low Impact (Low/Very Low) | 34% | 27% | 22% | 23% |
| Very high impact | 4% | 8% | 11% | 11% |
| High impact | 13% | 19% | 20% | 19% |
| Moderate impact | 32% | 32% | 36% | 37% |
| Low impact | 20% | 18% | 12% | 13% |
| Very low impact | 14% | 9% | 10% | 10% |
| No impact | 16% | 14% | 11% | 9% |
| Don’t know/Prefer not to say | 1% | 1% | 1% | - |
Most producers heavily rely on friends and personal contacts (78%), followed by agrologists or other advisors (67%) to make decisions on which practices to implement on their farms. A majority also say they rely on their equipment or supply vendors (59%) and industry associations (57%) for advice.
Social media (41%) and podcasts (26%) are also emerging sources of information. Notably, producers of all ages are almost equally likely to mention social media as an information source.
| Total | ATL | QC | ON | MB | SK | AB | BC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Friends, neighbours or other personal contacts | 78% | 87% | 70% | 82% | 86% | 80% | 78% | 69% |
| An agrologist or other advisor | 67% | 65% | 85% | 64% | 69% | 66% | 67% | 47% |
| An equipment or supply vendor | 59% | 63% | 73% | 60% | 58% | 52% | 52% | 60% |
| Industry association | 57% | 78% | 41% | 71% | 51% | 47% | 60% | 58% |
| Social media | 41% | 44% | 44% | 40% | 32% | 42% | 42% | 43% |
| Podcast | 26% | 36% | 12% | 30% | 26% | 29% | 27% | 22% |
| Responses in the total column for 2024 wave that are less than 10% are not shown. | ||||||||
Canadian producers claim to be well prepared to face emergencies – that is, nine in ten (89%) have taken at least one action to manage or plan for emergencies and risks that their farm operations may face. Over half have taken environmental and sustainability measures (57%) and have ensured back-up power generation or infrastructure enhancements (54%). Nearly half (46%) have a traceability system in place and 39% have developed an Emergency Plan outlining all steps to take in such a situation. At least two fifths of producers have taken biosecurity (42%) and animal welfare (40%) measures.
| 2024 | 2022* | 2018* | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Environment and/or sustainability measures | 57% | 71% | 62% |
| Back-up power generation/infrastructure enhancement | 54% | 48% | 48% |
| Traceability system | 46% | 56% | 53% |
| Biosecurity measures (plant/animal disease) | 42% | 40% | 36% |
| Animal welfare measures | 40% | 55% | 52% |
| Developed an Emergency Plan that outlines procedures to take in an emergency** | 39% | 35% | 33% |
| Participation in a business risk management program offered by government | 32% | 38% | 39% |
|
Other Responses are 5% or less and are therefore not shown. *In 2024, some of the options provided are different from those in 2018 and 2022. Thus, the results cannot be directly compared with 2018 and 2022 results. However, where the context or language used is similar, tracking data is shown. **Asked as a separate question in 2018 and 2022: Do you have an Emergency Management Plan in place for your farm operation? Results cannot be directly compared due to the method in which the question was asked and changes in the question wording. However, as it is indicative of an Emergency Plan, results from 2018 and 2022 are shown in the table. |
|||
Most producers (90%) are aware of at least one AAFC program or initiative, with a majority saying they have seen, heard, or read about AgriStability (78%) and AgriInvest (74%). A slim majority also report being aware of AgriInsurance (56%) and the Advance Payment Program (51%). The other AAFC programs and initiatives tested are lesser known.
| Total | Farm Income (Under $500k) | Farm Income ($500k or more) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heard, seen, or read of any one program | 90% | 88% | 97% |
| AgriStability | 78% | 74% | 91% |
| AgriInvest | 74% | 69% | 90% |
| AgriInsurance | 56% | 55% | 61% |
| Advance Payment Program | 51% | 46% | 70% |
| AgriRecovery | 36% | 33% | 45% |
| Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership | 32% | 27% | 46% |
| AgriInnovate Program | 24% | 22% | 29% |
| Agricultural Clean Technology Program | 24% | 22% | 31% |
| Agricultural Climate Solutions | 23% | 22% | 30% |
| Food Waste Reduction Challenge | 20% | 21% | 19% |
| Dairy Direct Payment Program | 18% | 15% | 30% |
| Local Food Infrastructure Fund | 14% | 14% | 12% |
| None of the above | 10% | 12% | 3% |
Of producers who are familiar (90%) with at least one of AAFC’s initiatives, the majority (64%) have applied to at least one such initiative for funding or support. The likelihood of applying to a program is directly linked to the level of awareness of the program. As producers are most aware of AgriStability and AgriInvest, they are also more likely to apply to these programs for funding and support – a majority of producers say they have applied to AgriInvest (71%) and AgriStability (67%). Although awareness is moderately high for AgriInsurance and the Advance Payment program, fewer (29% and 28% respectively) have applied to them.
Among those aware of AgriStability but did not apply for it, about a third (32%) say they did not need the program, while few say the program did not benefit them (11%). Just one in ten say they did not qualify for it (10%), and fewer than one in ten say the application was too complex (9%) or too costly (8%).
| Total | Farm Income (Under $500k) | Farm Income ($500k or more) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| AgriInvest | 71% | 65% | 81% |
| AgriStability | 67% | 66% | 69% |
| AgriInsurance | 29% | 26% | 34% |
| Advance Payment Program | 28% | 24% | 36% |
| Dairy Direct Payment Program | 12% | 9% | 19% |
| AgriRecovery | 12% | 13% | 10% |
| Agricultural Climate Solutions | 5% | 5% | 5% |
| Agricultural Clean Technology Program | 4% | 2% | 9% |
| AgriInnovate Program | 3% | 2% | 6% |
| Food Waste Reduction Challenge | 2% | 2% | 1% |
| Responses for the total results that are less than 2% are not shown. | |||
Just under one third (32%) of producers say they have heard, seen or read about the Sustainable Canadian Agriculture Partnership. Additionally, a similar proportion (38%) say they are very or somewhat familiar with the programming or services available under this initiative. While general awareness of the initiative is at the same level as seen in 2022 (34%) and somewhat higher than in 2018 (28%), familiarity with the details is much lower in 2024 than previous years (2018: 47% and 2022: 50%).
| 2024 | *2022 | *2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Familiar (Very / Somewhat) | 38% | 50% | 47% |
| Not familiar (Slightly / Not at all) | 62% | 50% | 52% |
| Very familiar | 8% | 10% | 13% |
| Somewhat familiar | 30% | 40% | 34% |
| Slightly familiar | 37% | 36% | 35% |
| Not at all familiar | 25% | 15% | 17% |
| Don’t know/prefer not to say | 0% | 0% | 1% |
| * In 2018 and 2022, producers were asked about the Canadian Agricultural Partnership. In 2024, producers were asked about the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership, a new partnership introduced in 2023. | |||
Among those that are aware of the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership, close to half (47%) have a positive impression of the program, with a significant portion (41%) of respondents saying they are neutral (34%) or unsure of their opinion (6%). Only one in ten (12%) hold a negative view. When compared to previous years, positive ratings have returned to the 2018 (49%) level after spiking in 2022 (58%). However, negative ratings continue to decline gradually.
| 2024 | *2022 | *2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Positive (Very / Somewhat positive) | 47% | 58% | 49% |
| Negative (Somewhat / Very negative) | 12% | 16% | 25% |
| Very positive | 7% | 9% | 10% |
| Somewhat positive | 40% | 49% | 39% |
| Neither positive nor negative | 34% | 22% | 20% |
| Somewhat negative | 9% | 11% | 14% |
| Very negative | 3% | 5% | 11% |
| Don’t know/prefer not to say | 6% | 4% | 6% |
| * In 2018 and 2022, producers were asked about the Canadian Agricultural Partnership. In 2024, producers were asked about the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership, a new partnership introduced in 2023. | |||
Over half (54%) of producers are aware of mental health support services or initiatives aimed specifically at Canadian producers and their families. However, just 2% of those who are aware, or only 1% of all producers, say they have accessed these services.
| Total | ATL | QC | ON | MB | SK | AB | BC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | 54% | 60% | 50% | 60% | 68% | 62% | 49% | 25% |
| No | 46% | 40% | 50% | 40% | 30% | 38% | 51% | 75% |
| Don’t know/Prefer not to say | - | - | - | - | 2% | - | - | - |
Though Canadians in general have grown more pessimistic about their economic future in recent years, more agriculture producers feel their farm operation will be better off (32%, down 4%) in five years than who feel it will be worse off (28%, unchanged).
These expectations are consistent with recent income growth, as just over a third (37%) of producers report that their net farm income has increased during the last five years, while 29% say it has decreased.
| Total | ATL | QC | ON | MB | SK | AB | BC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Better Off (Much/a little) | 32% | 44% | 41% | 33% | 33% | 29% | 25% | 35% |
| Worse Off (Much/a little) | 28% | 20% | 24% | 34% | 20% | 30% | 29% | 19% |
| Better Off minus Worse Off | +4% | +24% | +17% | -2% | +13% | -1% | -5% | +17% |
| Much better | 7% | 8% | 10% | 8% | 4% | 5% | 4% | 16% |
| A little better off | 25% | 36% | 31% | 25% | 30% | 24% | 21% | 20% |
| A little worse off | 16% | 7% | 13% | 21% | 14% | 19% | 17% | 11% |
| Much worse off | 12% | 13% | 10% | 14% | 7% | 11% | 13% | 8% |
| I don’t expect any change in the next five years | 33% | 31% | 32% | 27% | 30% | 35% | 39% | 37% |
| Don’t know/Prefer not to say | 7% | 6% | 3% | 6% | 16% | 7% | 7% | 9% |
One in four (26%) producers surveyed are women. There has been a small and gradual increase in the share of women producers over time; back in 2013, only 22% of producers surveyed were women. In the long run, this trend should increase, as the population of women producers is slightly younger than the population of men producers.
There are higher proportions of women producers in Alberta (32%) and British Columbia (31%), while Manitoba (8%) has the lowest proportion of women producers. Women are found in higher proportions in animal/livestock farms (34%), cattle ranching farms (30%), and plant/tree farms (30%). There are fewer women producers in oilseed/grain farms (18%).
Moreover, women producers tend to be on smaller farms; they make up one-third (33%) of the respondents from farms earning under $100,000 a year, but this figure decreases down to 14% among farms earning $1 million or more.
Women producers are somewhat more likely to say their net farm business income has decreased during the past five years (36%) compared to men (27%). That said, they are slightly more likely to say their household receives off-farm income (52% versus 47% men). Their outlook towards their farm’s future is similar to the men – 33% among both women and men feel their farm operation will be better off in the next five years, with women just slightly less pessimistic than the men (26% versus 29% worse off). However, compared to 2022 (42%), the positive outlook among women producers appears to have reduced notably.
When looking at future issues facing Canadian agriculture, women are equally likely to mention climate change (27%) and operational expenses (27%) as the main issues, while men are more likely to cite operational expenses (26%) rather than climate change as the main issue (17%). However, both men and women give almost equal priority to implementing environmental and sustainability measures on their farms (43% and 46% high priority respectively).
Women are less likely to be concerned about cyber security incidents than men (35% versus 42% concerned), but report being somewhat more prepared for such incidences than men (39% versus 32%).
Women producers are more likely to be aware of mental health services than men (60% versus 53%).
14% of producers surveyed are under the age of 45, with this figure down from 17% in 2013. Younger producers count a slightly higher share of women (28%) than older producers (25%).
Producers surveyed in British Columbia (21%) and Quebec (20%) are the most likely to be under 45, while the producer population skews older in Saskatchewan (only 4% are under 45 years).
Farms with incomes of $500K and above (23%) are more likely than smaller farms (income under $500K; 11%) to be led by younger producers. Young producers (55%) are somewhat more likely to say they receive off-farm income compared to those who are 45 years and older (47%).
Produce farms (23%) and dairy and milk production farms (23%) attract more younger producers, while cattle ranching farms (6%) and oilseed and grain farms (10%) are least likely to be led by younger producers. They are somewhat more likely to have organic certified farms (18%) compared to producers 45 years and older (10%).
Producers under 45 years have a much more optimistic outlook towards the future of their farm compared to older producers. 44% of young producers expect their farm's future to be better off versus 22% that expect it to be worse off. This is in line with their farm’s recent performance, where 47% report that their farm income has increased in the past five years compared to only 22% saying it has decreased. In comparison, those over 45 years are less likely to feel their farm’s future is better off (30% better off versus 29% worse off) and are also less likely to report that their net income has increased in the past five years (35% increase versus 31% decrease).
It is noteworthy that although this cohort mentions climate change impacts (46%) as the primary issue their farms have faced, they are less likely to do so than those 55-64 years (53%) or those age 65 and older (54%). Likewise, they are also more likely to mention production and input costs (30%) as the main issue that their farms may face in the future followed by climate change (14%). They are less concerned about future risks as they are slightly more likely to report being prepared for emergencies and have infrastructure enhancements in place than producers over 45 years. Moreover, young producers are also slightly more likely than older producers to turn to agrologists, equipment and supply vendors and other advisors for advice on which practices to implement on their farms.
At least half (51%) of young producers report experiencing labour shortages. They are more likely than older producers to have tried to overcome this by hiring temporary foreign workers (31%).
Young producers are less concerned about cyber security incidents (30%) compared to older producers (44% among 55 years and older), perhaps because they are more likely to feel prepared to deal with such incidents (39%).
Producers across all age groups are almost equally aware of mental health support services. However, young producers are more likely to have accessed these supports (2.5%) than those 45 years and older (less than 1%), in line with similar trends seen among the general public.
Half (51%) of producers surveyed are 65 years and over – these proportions are higher than seen in 2018 (35%) and 2022 (38%). Older producers are much more likely to be men (52%) than women (43%).
Older producers are more likely to be on farms in Saskatchewan (74%), Manitoba (64%), Atlantic Canada (58%) and Alberta (56%). There are fewer older producers in Ontario (43%) and British Columbia (37%), with the smallest proportions in Quebec (28%).
Cattle ranching farms are the most likely to be led by older producers (64%), followed closely by oilseed and grain farms (58%). Just over two-fifths animal and livestock farms (45%) and produce farms (42%) are led by older producers. Older producers are less common on plant and trees (30%) and dairy and milk production farms (34%).
Farms with incomes of under $500K (57%) are much more likely than mid-to-high income farms (income of $500K or more 31%) to be led by producers 65 years and older. Older producers (41%) are less likely to report receiving off-farm income compared to producers under 65 years (55%).
Older producers have mixed views when it comes to their farm’s business performance over the past 5 years: 35% say their net income has grown, 32% say it has stayed the same and 32% say it has decreased. Similar sentiments are expressed when it comes to the future of their farms: while 30% feel their farm will be better off, 25% say it will be worse off, with a larger 38% believing it will stay the same. In comparison, those under 65 years feel better about their financial situation with 39% reporting an increase in net income (versus 27% decrease) and 35% expecting their farm’s future to be better off in the next five years (versus 32% worse off).
Older producers are significantly less likely to have experienced labour shortages over the past two years (31%) and thus are less likely to be concerned about labour shortage in the future (4%) and are less likely to hire temporary foreign workers (12%) compared to producers under 65 years (46% experience labour shortage; 10% concerned; and 22% hired temporary foreign workers).
Compared to producers under 65 years (49%), producers 65 years and older (38%) are significantly less likely to consider implementing environment and sustainability practices on their farms as a high priority. Indeed, older producers are less likely to have implemented such measures on their farms – notably, they are less likely to have reduced fertilizer use (48% versus 58%), improved biodiversity (48% versus 61%) and taken actions to reduce food loss (47% versus 55%). However, they are more likely to have zero/low till systems (66% versus 57%).
Older producers are more concerned about cyber security incidents (44%) compared to those under 65 years (37%), probably because they feel less prepared to deal with such incidents (30% versus 38% respectively).
Note: Organic certified producers include those whose farms are already certified as well as those who are in the process of obtaining the certification.
One in ten (11%) producers surveyed report that their farm is organic certified (9%) or are in the process of obtaining an organic certification (2%). The proportion of farms with an organic certification remains consistent compared to 2022 (11%). Producers younger than 45 years (18%) and 65 years and older (13%) are more likely to say their farms are organic certified, compared to producers aged 45-54 (8%) and 55-64 (6%) years.
Producers in British Columbia (18%), Quebec (16%), Ontario (13%), and Atlantic Canada (12%) are more likely to report that their farms are organic certified or are in the process of it, while fewer farms in Saskatchewan (10%), Alberta (7%) and Manitoba (5%) are organic certified. Consistent with this year’s findings, a higher number of farms in British Columbia (21%) and Quebec (17%) reported being organic certified in 2022.
Produce farms (19%) are most likely to report being organic certified, followed by dairy and milk production farms (15%), plant and trees farms (12%), animal and livestock (10%), and oilseed and grain farms (10%), and only 6% of cattle ranching producers say they are certified. Similar proportions of high income ($500K or more; 10%) and mid to low income (Under $500K; 12%) farms report having an organic certification. Half of the organic certified farms receive off-farm income (49%), while an equal proportion reports not receiving such income (51%).
Organic certified producers are more likely to expect their farm’s future to be better off (43%) than worse off (19%) and have a notably more positive outlook than those who are not certified (31% better off versus 29% worse off). In terms of business performance, both cohorts experienced similar increases and decreases in net income over the past five years.
There are no remarkable differences between organic certified and non-certified farms when it comes to challenges and risks faced. However, organic certified farms are less likely to feel production and input costs will be a challenge in the future compared to the latter (14% versus 27%).
Over half (54%) of the organic certified producers say they have experienced labour shortages over the past two years compared to the non-certified farms (36%). They are also slightly more likely to hire temporary foreign workers (23% versus 16% non-certified farms).
Organic certified producers (67%) are much more likely to assert a high priority on implementing environmental practices on their farms compared to those who are non-certified (40%). They are significantly more likely than non-certified producers to have implemented food safety measures (81% versus 56%), improved biodiversity (80% versus 51%), environmental stewardship programs (72% versus 57%), and improved water quality (63% versus 44%).
Oilseed and grain farms (27%)
Cattle ranching farms (21%)
Produce farms (16%)
Animal and livestock farms (12%)
Dairy, cattle and milk production farms (9%)
Pollara conducted telephone surveys, using Computer-Aided Telephone Interviewing (CATI) technology, with 1,351 agricultural producers across Canada. A detailed discussion of the approach used to complete this research is presented below.
The sampling plan for the study was designed by Pollara in collaboration with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC). The research requirement entailed collecting samples from the following:
Sample was obtained from Dunn & Bradstreet of agriculture producers.
The surveys were conducted in English and in French, based on the respondent’s preference, from January 14, 2024, to February 26, 2024. Both landlines and cell phones were dialed, and up to 5 call-back attempts were made to every number. The average length of the telephone interviews was 20 minutes.
The introduction to the phone survey stressed that participation in the survey was voluntary, and that information provided would remain private and confidential, in compliance with the Privacy Act and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). Participants were provided assurance that none of their identifiable information would be shared with AAFC.
Pollara conducted 1,351 interviews. Considering the total population of agricultural producers in Canada, the margin of error for a probability based sample of 1,351 producers would be ±2.7%, 19 times out of 20. The margin of error is larger for subpopulations, and it should be noted that some subgroups have insufficient sample sizes to draw significant observations. Statistical differences between sub-groups or between waves are determined based on Z-test testing at 95% confidence.
To achieve data reliability in all subgroups, Canadian producers were surveyed in all regions of the country. Demographic information of respondents was collected, and the final data was weighted by province and farm sales based on Statistics Canada’s 2021 Census of Agriculture.
The table below presents the geographic and demographic distribution of respondents, before and after weighting.
| Region | Unweighted total | Weighted total |
|---|---|---|
| Atlantic Canada | 73 | 44 |
| Quebec | 429 | 209 |
| Ontario | 283 | 344 |
| Manitoba | 83 | 103 |
| Saskatchewan | 224 | 243 |
| Alberta | 196 | 295 |
| British Columbia | 113 | 113 |
| Language | Unweighted total | Weighted total |
|---|---|---|
| English | 929 | 1144 |
| French | 422 | 207 |
| Farm Revenue | Unweighted total | Weighted total |
|---|---|---|
| $10,000 to just under $50,000 | 109 | 409 |
| $50,000 to just under $100,000 | 119 | 203 |
| $100,000 to just under $250,000 | 204 | 249 |
| $250,000 to just under $500,000 | 206 | 173 |
| $500,000 to just under $1,000,000 | 229 | 94 |
| $1,000,000 or more | 484 | 223 |
| Age | Unweighted total | Weighted total |
|---|---|---|
| Under 45 | 252 | 185 |
| 45-54 | 223 | 180 |
| 55-64 | 350 | 302 |
| 65 and over | 526 | 684 |
| Respondent | Unweighted total | Weighted total |
|---|---|---|
| Men | 1032 | 954 |
| Women | 276 | 345 |
| Other | 43 | 51 |
The following tables presents the distribution of farm operations according to province:
| Label | Equation | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| ATL – Atlantic | 3.2290% | |
| QC – Quebec | PROV =QC | 15.4734% |
| ON – Ontario | PROV =ON | 25.4621% |
| MB – Manitoba | PROV =MB | 7.6593% |
| SK - Saskatchewan | PROV =SK | 17.9740% |
| AB - Alberta | PROV =AB | 21.8592% |
| BC - British Columbia | PROV =BC | 8.3429% |
The following tables presents the distribution of farm operations according to revenue level:
| Label | Equation | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| $10,000 to just under $50,000 | Q2=2 | 30.3% |
| $50,000 to just under $100,000 | Q2=3 | 15.0% |
| $100,000 to just under $250,000 | Q2=4 | 18.4% |
| $250,000 to just under $500,000 | Q2=5 | 12.8% |
| $500,000 or more | Q2=6,7 | 23.5% |
Prior to launching the survey, Pollara tested the links to ensure programming matched the questionnaire in both languages and included the correct use of skips and randomizations. A “soft launch” of the survey was conducted first to validate the programming and to ensure respondents did not have any issues with the question wording. Pollara reviewed soft launch data and listened to recordings of the soft launch interviews before proceeding to full launch.
A total of 11,459 producers were attempted to be reached for this project. The refusal rate for this survey was 36%, while the participation rate was 33%. Though this is a relatively high participation rate for public opinion research, the risk of non-response bias is still present. Producers who do not have the time to take a survey might be more common on certain types of farms. That said, even if non-response bias exists, results should still be comparable to past waves, as those were fielded using a similar methodology.
Full contact statistics are provided below:
| Total numbers attempted | 11,459 |
|---|---|
| Out-of-scope – invalid | 2,340 |
| Unresolved – no answer, answering machine | 3,741 |
| Refusals | 1,711 |
| In-scope – non-responding | 635 |
| Language barrier | 38 |
| Incapable of completing (ill) | 218 |
| Callback - not available | 379 |
| In-scope – responding | 3,032 |
| Incomplete | 117 |
| Callback – did not complete | 596 |
| Did not qualify - Q1 (Not decision maker) | 122 |
| Did not qualify - Q2 (Not enough sales) | 162 |
| Did not qualify - Q3 (Age) | 33 |
| Did not qualify – no longer on farm | 651 |
| Completes | 1,351 |
Note to interviewers: Be proactive if you feel that respondents are not in a good environment (too much noise) or other good conditions to answer the questionnaire. In these cases, schedule a telephone appointment to administer the survey.
Good morning/afternoon/evening. My name is _______________ and I am calling from Pollara, a public opinion research company. Would you prefer that I continue in English or French? Préférez-vous que je continue en français ou en anglais?
We are conducting a study of agricultural producers on behalf of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada about some important issues facing the sector across Canada. Your participation is voluntary, and the survey will take about 20 minutes to complete. Please be assured that your identity and individual answers will be kept strictly confidential.
Note to interviewers: If respondent has concerns about privacy, read the following: Any information you provide will be administered in accordance with the Privacy Act and other applicable privacy laws. Your decision to participate or not will not affect any dealings you may have with the Government of Canada in any way.
Note to interviewers: If the respondent wants more information about the survey, read the following: The research is designed to provide AAFC with key insights into the views of producers on current issues in agriculture in Canada and on priorities and policies that affect the agriculture and agri-food sector in Canada.
Note to interviewers: If a respondent asks you about the legitimacy of this project or if the respondent wants to make a complaint or a comment about this project, they may call 416-921-0090.
Note to interviewers: If a respondent requests to speak with a study leader at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, please take his / her name and phone number and mention that a supervisor will call back to establish the link with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
Language: [Interviewer recorded]
[Ask all]
Screen1. Have I reached you on a cellular phone? [do not read list]
[Ask if screen1=yes]
Screen2. Are you in a safe place to talk on the telephone? [do not read
list]
[If screen2=no, read:] We would like to conduct this interview with you when it is safe and convenient to do. Thank you for your time, we will call back when it is more convenient.
Screen3. Before we begin the interview, I am required to inform you that for quality control reasons, this interview may be recorded. May we begin?
[If yes or joint, continue. If no, ask to speak to that person, read intro again. If unavailable, arrange callback. If no decision maker thank and terminate.]
Now, we’d like to know a bit more about your farm operation and how you manage risk to your business.
Now we are going to talk specifically about cybersecurity and cyber incidents.
A cyber incident is any unauthorized attempt, whether successful or not, to gain access to, modify, destroy, delete, or render unavailable any computer network or system resource. Based on this definition...
In these next few questions we would like to understand the ways in which your farming operation may be responding to changing consumer trends.
Which of the following measures, programs or practices, if any, have you
implemented? If it is not applicable to your farm operation, please say
so.
[randomize and read list and check all that apply. If asked, interviewer
should clarify that these programs could have been ones implemented by the
farm operator on their own, with a sector/industry association or with
government.]
Environment [do not read]
Public Trust [Do not read]
The next few questions are about labour market challenges that you may or may not be experiencing.
This section asks about Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) initiatives.
Finally, these last few questions will help us analyse your responses.
Thank you very much for your time and participation. The results of the research will be available to the general public, on the Library and Archives website, in the coming months.