|
| ||

|
April
30, 2009 Deconstructing Dinner
Whose Interests Are Converging at
Canada's Agricultural Schools?
An investigative look into the philosophies and
academic backgrounds driving the University of Guelph's agriculture program. Jon Steinman
On
April 10, this column featured the latest from a dramatic story out of the
University of Guelph. Guelph
is home to Canada's largest agricultural school, among which, is the very small
organic degree program. In late March, it was announced that because of
budgetary challenges, the organic program would be cut among others displaying
low enrollment. As
a result of many people stepping forward and voicing their concerns, the
program was permitted to continue for another twelve months. With this extension,
the agricultural college is now required to boost enrollment in the organic
program and has been tasked with meeting a number of conditions proposed by the
university senate. One condition requires the college to seek "industry
support". 'Industry
support'? In
my years examining Canada's agri-food system, I can comfortably confirm that
there is far from a ready-to-burst-bubble of 'industry support' for organic
agriculture. The
only way that I can imagine any 'industry support' for organic agriculture
could be generated, is if the definition of organic is based upon the same
industrial principles of conventional systems that instead rely on 'organic'
substitutes. As
any proponent of 'true' organic would agree, 'organic' agriculture that mimics
conventional systems is NOT organic. What
is it then about the University of Guelph that prevents them from understanding
the economic, ecological and social opportunities of organic agriculture and
food? Some
of those who have opposed the University's interest to cut the program have
already drawn conclusions that a conspiracy is afoot. While such a proposition
might very well be the case, there appears to be a much more tangible and
likely rationale. The
University of Guelph is home to Canada's pre-eminent food and agricultural
programs, and almost all of them are founded upon principles of industrial
production and the genetic manipulation of lifeforms (biotechnology). These
approaches generate significant profits for industry and are similarly supported
by current and previous federal government policies. Unfortunately,
the historic and ongoing push to strengthen such models has provided little
financial support to farmers. Instead, agri-food profits end up in the handful
of corporations involved within the food system and the many pharmaceutical
companies who profit from poor animal and human health. We also can't forget
the many oil companies who also benefit from fueling these resource-dependent
models. And so if the success of the
agri-food sector is measured by budgets and bottom lines, then the University
of Guelph would likely believe that industrial conventional models are working
just fine. Why wouldn't they? The University not only feeds the companies
profiting most heavily from the food system, they too, by extension, become a
huge recipient of that final food dollar and the taxes expended by every
Canadian. A
telling chronology of events helps suggest that this is indeed the case. On
April 3, President Alastair Summerlee issued an on-line video announcing that
some programs would be cut and the University was forced to choose "which ones
to focus greater financial resources onto". As it applies to agriculture, one
must ask where those financial resources will be allocated? The answer came
only days later, and on the very same day when senators were deliberating the
future of the organic program. The University issued a press release titled,
"MaRs Landing Mission Continues". MaRS Landing stands for Medical and Related
Sciences Links to Agricultural Network for Development and Innovation with
Guelph. In short, MaRs Landing is a project linking
research in Guelph and Toronto that focuses on biotechnology (the manipulation
and corporate ownership of lifeforms) - technologies that organic philosophies
do not support. When
looking closer at the MaRs Landing project, the convergence of philosophies and
interests begins to paint a clearer picture of the preferred direction of the
University among its primary decision makers. Take university president Alastair Summerlee
for example. He was a strong supporter of cutting the organic agriculture
program. Summerlee's background is in biomedical sciences and the Ontario
Veterinary College. As it happens, MaRs Landing provides "a connection between agriculture
and food, veterinary and rural-related discoveries with medical, scientific and
health advances in Ontario"! As for the University's Board of
Governors, a number of industrial food system proponents are among them. The
most notable; Lyle Vanclief - Canada's Minister of Agriculture between
1997-2003. Vanclief developed and introduced the Agricultural Policy Framework
(APF) - a foundational set of visions/goals representative of current
agricultural policies in Canada. The five-year $9.4 billion dollar bilateral
agreement between federal and provincial governments was rooted in these same
models of industrial production that have already proven to not serve farmers
or the environment very well at all. Vanclief is/was a vocal supporter of
biotechnology. It
should come as no surprise then that MaRs Landing receives its funding from the
"Agricultural Policy Framework". You
can expect updates on the future of the University of Guelph's organic
agriculture program on future columns. Deconstructing
Dinner is heard on radio stations across Canada and is available as a Podcast.
More and expanded information on today's topic can be found at
(www.cjly.net/deconstructingdinner/040909.htm). |
![]() Subscribe to our bi-weekly column's RSS feed
![]()
|
|
![]() This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.
|