Canada should end its “farmer buy-and-try” approach to testing non-fertilizer supplements and resurrect its trusted efficacy testing program to support eco-friendly fertilizer alternatives, says the National Farmers Union (NFU).
“The existing knowledge at the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the former testing system is the most efficient solution for efficacy testing in Canada,” NFU policy analyst James Hannay said in a media release, referring to regulations, repealed in 2013, that once required companies to validate their products through field trials before selling them to farmers.
Prior to budget cuts that dissolved the program, Canada’s testing system was internationally respected and provided farmers with reliable data on how non-fertilizer supplements would help crop production. Non-fertilizer supplements, which can improve soil health and boost plant yields, include alternatives like biochar, manures, and bio-stimulants that can improve productivity in place of conventional fertilizers like urea—a widely-used, climate-intensive option that emits nitrous oxide when applied.
A recent NFU report [pdf] says resurrecting the CFIA program could help farmers as they attempt to adjust production strategies for greater environmental benefits like building soil health and reducing emissions.
Under the previous system, companies selling non-fertilizer supplements were required to conduct multi-site field trials over several years and submit their findings to the CFIA. Only products that met efficacy standards could be registered for sale in Canada. The NFU says the system was so highly respected that companies based in other countries would register their products in Canada, as it would increase their market acceptance abroad having passed Canadian standards of efficacy.
After the program’s repeal, farmers were left to test supplements themselves, and companies could market products with unverified claims. Without the backing of efficacy testing, farmers face the full burden of costs and risks when they experiment with new products—leading many to avoid unproven supplements altogether.
The NFU argues that farmers lack the resources for statistically significant trials that can determine if new products genuinely address issues like climate resilience. And voluntary, independent verification by companies is unlikely to be rigorous and transparent.
“As rainfall and temperatures become more inconsistent and extreme due to climate change, any product that aims to stabilize yields will be of great interest to farmers,” writes NFU. “However, without independent verification that [the] supplements work consistently and beneficially, their adoption will be delayed.”
If supplements are subject to CFIA testing, “a wide range of farmers could gain important new production options, including farmers who want to take a lower-input approach, organic farmers, those seeking more resilience or to regenerate soils, and those who prefer to farm in ways that rely more on biological inputs and less on chemical and industrial ones,” the union adds.
