Ottawa-Farmers are facing more than weather risks as they plant this year’s crops, says Bruce Burrows, executive director of Grain Growers of Canada (GGC).

The higher cost of inputs, especially fuel and fertilizer, underscore the need for Business Risk Management (BRM) programs that are responsive, predictable and capable of stabilizing operations through uncertain times, Burrows told the Commons agriculture committee.

“Trade disruptions, geopolitical tensions, transportation interruptions and regulatory uncertainty can all have significant financial consequences for producers, yet they're not always captured effectively within current programming.”

“Tools such as AgriStability are intended to provide whole-farm income support during major shocks, but many producers experience meaningful income declines without triggering payments. Improving the responsiveness will strengthen both participation and confidence in the program.”

He noted a Farm Credit Canada study found producers are expected to invest approximately $22.5 billion in crop inputs for this season alone, which includes seeds, fertilizers and pesticides.

This level of investment “represents one of the most significant annual - and therefore regular - private sector investments in Canada, months before any revenue is realized.”

In addition to elevated input costs and tight margins, producers are increasingly exposed to risks far outside their control such as navigating geopolitical disruptions, trade uncertainty and supply chain instability.

“Existing business risk management programs were not designed for this environment.”

Losses of a dollar or two per bushel of crop can translate into six-figure impacts on individual farm operations. The next federal-provincial agreement, which will start in 2028, must ensure that BRM programming “reflects a multitude of risks that farmers are facing today and are likely to face in the future.”

The existing core BRM program such as AgriInsurance must remain strong because it is widely used, regionally responsive and delivers support when producers need it most. The current cost-sharing model between governments and producers should be maintained.

BRM programs must better reflect emerging risks beyond production losses and remain flexible enough to reflect regional realities. “A one-size-fits-all approach limits effectiveness and reduces program uptake.”

“That is why AgriStability needs adjustment to reflect commodity and regional differences, ensuring provinces retain flexibility to tailor delivery to regional needs, which will strengthen outcomes for producers across the country.”

BRM programming should support proactive risk management rather than create an unnecessary administrative burden. Proposals to link AgriInvest participation more directly to environmental cross-compliance risks duplicating practices that farmers are already implementing.

Grain producers are leaders in environmental stewardship through measures such as zero till adoption, precision agriculture and soil carbon management. Programs should recognize these contributions rather than introduce requirements that reduce accessibility and effectiveness.

Kate Sauser, GGC’s Policy Manager, said BRM “should be looked at as an economic strategy. We are a $45-billion export sector so rather than support payments, it should be looked at more as an economic strategy to help mitigate those losses.”

AgriStability does not attract is a huge amount of participation because its responsiveness level is quite low so improving that would increase participation, she said.

This news report prepared for National Newswatch