Scenario Building:

ECONOMIC- Farmers will continue to look at their bottom line when deciding what BMP’s to adapt. BMP’s if adapted correctly can actually lead to increasing productivity levels; this will also be given consideration by farmers.

Governments both at the Provincial and Federal level will have to provide funding in order to encourage farmers to adapt BMP’s.
Funding will also be necessary to educate and train farmers about BMP’s. Citizens/community activists can apply pressure for Provincial legislation regarding the adoption of BMP’s to aid in increased surface and ground water quality for today and in the future.

Critical Uncertainties: Factor’s such as climate, water supply and export prices for agriculture goods will determine the amount of money farmers will be able to invest in BMP’s.

Predetermined Elements: a certain amount of Government funding will be allotted to the Agricultural Sector. Technological advancements will continue to be made in Agriculture.


ENVIRONMENTAL- the increasing awareness of the ecological damage humans are creating and the concern regarding water quality are crucial driving forces of the adoption of BMP’s.
 

Farmers- a growing awareness of the damage agricultural run-off is inflicting on the environment especially with regards to water quality, has become a concern. Farmers are also more attuned to the fact that continued environmental degradation is having effects on productivity levels.
Government- Increasing pressure from concerned citizen groups and environmental indicators (ex. Water quality) are causing a shift in policy from one of ‘management by accident’ to prevention.
Citizens/Activists- Knowledge of the environmental degradation associated with poor agricultural practices is prompting action. This is evidenced by the increase in organic farming for example.	http://www.greenpeace.ca/e/about/campaign.html
Critical Uncertainties: Measurement of scope of damage with regards to effects agricultural run-off is having on water quality. Walkerton tragedy could easily occur again if knowledge remains inadequate.
Predetermined Elements: Environmental damage is occurring. Water quality is diminishing. Poor agricultural practices lead to water quality degradation in both surface and ground water supplies. Concerns regarding water quality issues will continue to accelerate.

TECHNOLOGICAL:

Farmers- Are increasingly adapting new technologies and knowledge that helps to impede agricultural run-off thereby lessening its impact on water quality, while at the same time increasing productivity levels. As agricultural land continues to diminish as a result of non-agricultural practices role of technology will become increasingly important. Technological advancement can be seen in the area of Best Management Practices for combating the effects agricultural run-off has on water quality. Manure management and containment, soil conservation methods, and treatment systems for milk-wash (Dairy Farms) are a few examples.

Government- Governments continue to fund agriculture research and development. Institutions such as the University of Guelph continue to devise and implement new agricultural technologies. As new technologies become available provincial governments should be responsible for the dispersal of information. Citizens- Expectations will be that as new technologies are made available, they will be required to be implemented on farms, especially when the technologies are economically viable.

Critical Uncertainties: Affordability of new technology, speed of development, speed of implementation, government policy regarding adoption of new technologies and amount of environmental deterioration all be considered as critical uncertainties when looking at technology as a driving force.Predetermined Elements: The continuation of technological advancement. Predetermined elements for technological advancement are difficult to assess given the nature of technology.

Driving Forces -

SOCIAL
Farmers: Farmers will take a vested interest in adopting sustainable agriculture techniques, especially when it comes to water quality, because their land is an investment. Anything that might impede production will in turn, affect economic productivity.

According to D.B. Harker et al, in their work "Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration Paper: The risk agriculture poses to water quality" (1998) the authors state, "because farmers live on the land and drink the water there, they will want to be among the first to understand what is happening, and to seek appropriate solutions.

In another paper of the same year, "Agricultural Impacts on Water Quality in Alberta" (CAESA) the report also states that, "farmers have increasingly come to realize that balancing agricultural growth with a clean environment is a vital part of doing business in today's world marketplace" (1998).

The on-farm effects of agricultural pollution might include: reduced productivity, increased production costs, and on-farm health. However, off-farm problems such as air and water pollution are usually borne by the public. The installment of 'due diligence' (where potential owners of a piece of property access the land for the possibility of future lawsuits due to present and future environmental hazards and so on) or insurance to cover the risk of problems due to agricultural run-off, might promote the use of BMPs to reduce insurance rates and protect farmers from lawsuits.

In addition to chemical monitoring, farmers practicing due diligence might look at the following indicators to determine insurance rates and the potential for future legal action:
- Aquatic Indicator species - relative health of a 'most sensitive species' (Harker et al., 1997)
- Biological diversity (Harker et al, 1997)
- Functional diversity - a sufficient range of species to perform the normal range of species to perform normal ecosystem functions (Harker et al, 1997)

Citizens/community activists: There is a public perception that water quality is deteriorating. However, when it comes to adapting BMPs, the farming public and the general public seem to have two very different views.

According to an Angus Reid Group Poll in 1993, Canadians see water pollution as "the most imperative environmental problem", while on Canadian prairies it has been argued that there is "very little evidence" that agriculture is a major contributor to water pollution (Harker, Hill and McDuffie, The 1st International Conference on Children's Health & Environment: 1998.)


Government: Public policy on water quality must effectively address both perceived and real conditions. However, the government - either provincial or federal - must actually acknowledge that agriculture is a significant contributor.

Harker (1998) suggests the following safe-fail methodologies to protect water quality from agricultural run-off.

"Where practical, efforts at monitoring and mitigating water quality should focus on existing and potential "hot spots" as early indicators of developing problems. These may be irrigated lands or sites adjacent to intensive livestock operations where difficulties could be experienced first....people need to get over the shock of low levels of herbicides being detected and focus attention on identifying those worst case scenarios where herbicide concentrations may occasionally approach limits in water quality guidelines" (1998:9).

Critical Uncertainties: Some farming communities perceive the following as reasons why they have no choice but to pollute rather than to adopt BMPs:

- Beyond their control
- Reduce risk: managers might feel that they must use higher levels of pesticides, fertilizers, etc. to reduce production risk
- Low profits: there may be few funds available with which to make environmental changes which require large capital expenditure
-Partial cost: farmers are not required to pay the full social cost of pollution, and therefore select practices that differ from provincially acceptable BMPs (Harker, et al. 1998)
- Unaware: farmers may be unaware of the adverse effect of their practices

Predetermined Elements: Natural background levels of nutrients may already be high, or weather patterns may result in uncontrollable leaching and runoff (Harker et al. 1998)

POLITICAL:
Farmers: There may be pressure from international agricultural communities and the public to adopt more environmentally sustainable communities.

Harker et al (1998) states that in several agricultural communities around the world, sustainable land management practices are being implemented. Some of these BMPs include:
- Corrective chemical use: choosing the correct chemical and right amount for the problem at hand
- Preventing backflow: refusing to fill spray equipment directly from well heads
- Relocation of cattle: and other animal holdings away from wells and surface water
- Restricting application sites: such that surface and well waters will not be affected


Government: However, it is often difficult to assimilate the opinions of a regionally diverse country such as Canada to compose a comprehensive policy to effectively implement BMPs.

Citizens/activists: The social costs of implementing BMPs are also intrinsic in the cost incurred in the product. A socially optimal level of pollution control requires balancing the benefits of reduced levels of pollution with the costs of achieving them (Harker, 1998). The costs may have to be borne by the public (i.e. organically grown produce/livestock generally costs more than those that are not) and the acceptance of a more 'environmentally friendly' product may be an intrinsic factor contributing to the absorption of the product.

Critical Uncertainties: Harker et al (1997) states the following of Best Management Practices:
"In the past, a type of moral persuasion has been used in OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries to promote environmental quality and sustainable agriculture. The objective has been to increase farmer awareness of potential contributions to environmental problems, and of potential best management practices to reduce those problems. However, such measures have met with limited success. This has led to interest in exploring alternative policy instruments" (1997: 11).

Thus an amalgamation of BMPs with the strong arm of legislation, ensures that farmers practice environmentally responsible agricultural methodologies.

Critical Uncertainties: The farming public may be resentful of any federal wide policy implementation - citing that each region has needs specific to its location that a broad umbrella policy may not be able to cover. Policies may not be able to adapt quickly enough to new information and changing economic trends in order to adequately protect the environment from agricultural run-off.

Predetermined Elements: Politics and public opinion will always remain firmly linked. As politicians may not always look to the greater good in the distant future, while looking only to the next election, platforms may change to reflect the change in public opinion poles. While the public might think water quality is one of the most important environmental problems one year, a leak in a nuclear reactor may lead the public to believe finding alternate energy sources as more of a pressing issue the next year.
 

Look Far Ahead in Advance of Decisions

To get out of the usual 'management by crisis' mode, we need to look at potential variables, scenarios to be avoided if at all possible, and favoured outcomes. In other words, static conditions are generally not problematic while they remain static. Problems, or crises, arise from change. Change implies amelioration or deterioration. The role of policy is to direct change away from deterioration and to conditions of stability or, if possible, amelioration. Here, in this project, we seek to reduce run-off and the problem associated with this, by suggesting scenarios which the take into consideration the key factors listed below.

There are two types of scales we can rank the key factors on, by importance and by uncertainty. Both of these scales are crucial to the development of the scenarios, as the help provide the foundation they are to be built on.
We identify the following three key factors and the most important in respect to run-off and its amelioration.

1. Changes in Agricultural Practices:
- Ability to farm greater amounts of land
- Improved farm technologies enable more efficient tilling of land
- Improved aqueduct systems to better channel water
- Increased effectiveness of antibiotics, growth hormones and other
- Medications given to farm animals

2. Changes in Consumer Demand:
- Growing awareness of environmental issues
- Increased price competition
- Quality of air, water and other natural products questioned

3. Government Policy:
- Priority given to international trade agreements as a means to promote domestic welfare
- Priority on domestic welfare through direct measures
- Demand made by citizens for improved protection and follow through

Scenarios to be avoided

Scenarios to be avoided are those that endanger public health. Affordable access to safe water and food supplies for the vast majority of Canadians is primary. Of secondary importance to the government is the appearance of good governance to insure a minimum of social unrest.
 

A. - Low Cost Food Option

Factors driving this development:

1. Increasing world population
- this implies a growing market with the means to pay for the food and also willing to pay (aid agencies, etc.)

2. Decreasing global food productive capacity
- soil degradation
- water shortages
- climate change

3. Absence of evidence of harm from GMO's, pesticide residue on foods, risks continue to be perceived as manageable.

4. Alternatives are perceived to be too risky

5. Free Trade is alive and well

Industry Structure
1. High Barriers to entry
2. Increasing size of production
3. Vertical and horizontal integration
4. High concentration
5. Increasing profitability

On New Year's Day 2024 the world celebrated the birth of the 10 millionth person. There was much rejoicing - governments promoted the birth as a sign of our prosperity. However, there were those who were skeptical and they wanted wide spread reform and greater efforts to become sustainable. The Greeners, as they were called were a global union with just over 2,000,000 members also had many sympathizers. They had been able to make some headway fighting for better farm practices (like more efficient irrigation, less reliance on chemicals, mixed cropping and such), but there was a more powerful force that they could barely touch - the GMOPUs (Genetically Modified Organism Producers Union).

After years of successive government's failure to formulate and implement safe/fail policies with respect to agricultural policy, big business has finally gained effective global control of this sector. The GMOPU formed in 2010 by 9 very powerful companies, just after long-term tests showed that GMOs did not have any negative side effects. With the variable weather of late caused in great part to global warming, people saw GMOs as a savior. Food could be produced nearly everywhere and it would be rich in all of the vitamins necessary for life, so that even the poorest of the poor could get a healthy meal every day. Additionally, fewer chemicals were needed in the production because the plants were designed to repel pests. People were thrilled! With such technology starvation could be eradicated, less digestion leaching of chemicals into the worlds systems, and, best of all, a better world could be delivered because of greater cooperation. However, this did not happen, things just seem to get worse.

Nevertheless, Canada is positioned well here as its close ties with the Americans and Europeans and friendly relations with much of the world have helped a great deal. Canada was able to produce greater number of crops because of the abundance of land and take advantage of being part of the wealthy nations. Canada was still operating in a surplus which allowed for an increase in government funding, including funding to develop better agriculture technologies. The Greeners and other NGOs have taken advantage of this and have applied for grants where they hope to develop environmentally friendly technologies. These groups want us to live in a greater sustainable manner and as such are promoting reduced consumption on all levels. Canada was considered advanced, and Canadians were happy to be Canadians in this time of prosperity.

Agribusiness has effectively painted the world into a corner. Steadily accelerating losses of biodiversity had been used to argue for government support of the biotech industry. In the event of ecosystem failure, cutting edge bioengineering would be needed to replace keystone species. Among certain left-wing academics, the eco/ eco system was being compared to two lovers on the Titanic, about to get their last cold shower. As corporate agriculture continues to drive small private operations of the market through control of everything from farm machinery to seeds, the chances of reform seems to be fading away.

The potential for low cost food was available, but the technology to produce it was hidden in labs far away from the public and only the companies who owned patents could access it. This was informal colonialism at its best. The poorest nations still could not produce enough food to feed their populations and starvation continued. Tariffs and barriers to trade were being setup everywhere. Ironically, it seemed as though, if you weren't part of the G-8 then you could not access the cheapest food.

B. - MOVE TO ORGANIC / ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY BMP'S

Factors driving this development:
1. Human health problems arise from current practices.
2. Loss of biodiversity becomes an urgent public concern
3. Problems / conflicts arise from free trade.
4. Agricultural productivity falls and is explained by problems with current practices
5. Rebellion against globalization
6. Isolationism arising from increased terrorism

Industry Structure
1. Competitive
2. low concentration
3. low barriers to entry, although consumers are willing to pay premium prices for "trust"
4. smaller scale operations
5. Some integration in the form of food coops, farmers markets, crop insurance pooling, etc. but,
generally little vertical or horizontal integration.
6. Low profitability

By the time 2050 rolls around a very different world exists from the one we have today. There have been multiple international wars all stemming from terrorism; September 11th was just the first in a string of acts that would throw the hegemonic state of the US and the Western world into question. People are scared by the sharp increase in cancer rates that have been linked to the digestion of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as well as pesticides, herbicides and fungicides. People are looking for a safe alternative so they are looking towards organic foods. Migration to relatively "pristine" areas has a devastating impact on biodiversity.

People are extremely worried by the virtual outbreak "superbugs" and of cancer. One out of every four people in Canada is being diagnosed with having some form of cancer. Although there have been great strides taken to treat cancer, a cure is yet to be found and people are increasing dying from the disease. Links to the cancer outbreak have been linked with chemicals used in farms around the world. Citizens are therefore pushing for more stringent laws to restrict the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides, or at the very least reduce them, develop safe farming practices and develop better methods for monitoring. The activists in Canada are hailing the early 2000s Better Management Practices as a great step forward for agriculture and want to see more such projects. A Safe/Fail approach is the modus operandi of every government that does not want to risk being overthrown, never mind losing reelection.

Major transformations are taking place in eco/ecosystems. People are increasingly turning to organic foods because they have less impact on the environment. Organic foods don't use chemicals to keep the crops from being ruined by pests, but instead use a greater mix of plants that mimic natural ways to repel insects. Incidentally, this helps reduce run-off because of the increased mix of vegetation, and if run-off occurs it is far less damaging. What were small companies in the 2000s have now been able to flourish, especially since major Western companies aren't holding them back. However, they are not nation-wide companies, they are still local businesses, but they are just as common as the 2000s supermarkets. Demographic changes reflect a growing fear of urban life and a desire for what is thought to be the simpler ways of the past. Ironically, the move to rural areas takes some valuable agricultural land out of production and also results in losses of wildlife habitat. In some ways, people consider themselves fortunate that world population fluctuates between stable and slightly declining.

The Terrorism Wars, as they are now referred to, have also shaken up our traditional economic system. People want to understand who they are supporting when they buy a product, and they are more willing to pay a little more to know that there money is going to help local companies and not the international organization they have come to question. Therefore, simply walking into a mall and picking up something, paying for it and walking out never having read the label is not common. When one walks into a mall now, nearly everyone has their personal internet devices in hand scanning the product they are about to purchase. Post-modernism is alive and well. People will not blindly go about their daily lives anymore; they are demanding accountability.

C. Radical Gloom and Doom

1.global warming exceeds expectations
2.Canada takes a few more black eyes from U.S. companies suing under NAFTA because Canada tries to put legislation in place to ban products that are dangerous
3. Global food production becomes erratic

Canadians are more and more upset with American's. By 2030 a different world has emerged than the one we grew up in. U.S. foreign policy is devoted solely and overtly to maintaining and expanding U.S. economic dominance around the globe. Greater trade restrictions are being implemented in the U.S. than ever before, the lumber tariffs were just the beginning. Canadians are livid; they feel like they are being treating like a U.S. colony. The Canadian government is trying its best to quell the extremely strong anti-American sentiments by trying to not be so strongly aligned with the U.S. One measure the Canadian government has done is to introduce 'green policies'. These include things like reduced chemical use in agriculture, increased regulation and monitoring in agricultural practices, and the support of other nations that do so in terms of exclusive trade deals. The EU has been supportive of Canada's initiatives, but is not willing to go against the Americans who are still very strong internationally, or at least not willing to go against the Americans yet. There has been talk of forming an Atlantic Union that would include Canada in the EU but that is still a long way away.

There are more pressing matters that are on the world's agenda like global warming. Global warming has become a major problem worldwide. There have been massive droughts in much of the world, and when rain comes it pours over-saturating the soil, increasing run-off. This has resulted in a reduced food production and consequently widespread famine. In North America a large desert stretching from southern Alberta to Texas continues to expand while agricultural production falls. As the Americans become increasingly dependent on foreign suppliers, they become equally inventive in devising means of securing those sources of supply. This has hit the poor hardest, including much of Africa and India, but also those in wealthy nations that are poor. Food prices have skyrocketed and the majority of people simply can't afford to buy enough food. The fertility rate has dropped, and corruption has become commonplace in most countries including Canada. Canadians have been spared the brunt of many of the hardships because they were in a relatively good stature when the crises broke out, but things aren't as good as they once were either.

As a result of an extensive Royal Commission entitled "Future Eco/Ecosystem in Canada, Policy Implications", combined with raging public opinion, Canada has chosen to become more self-sufficient. Focus has turned to ensuring national stability regardless of international pressures. Individual provinces within Canada have enjoyed great success in farming recently, most notably Alberta. Their sustainable agricultural practices have been rewarded by the Canadian government by issuing grants so that they can help develop ways for other provinces to improve their own farming techniques. Although many have criticized the increased focus on self-sufficiency, there seems to be little alternative. International relations seem to be a greater detriment to survival today than ever before because other nations are so desperate they are virtually demanding assistance. Improved agricultural techniques including strict application of safe/fail and risk management principles to soil, water and waste management, have helped Canada increase productivity as greater areas can now be farmed then ever before, but are still not sufficiently able to support its own population.
 

Step 8

1) Water Quality Monitoring (pH, D.O., TDS and nutrients (N P K & S)

2) Surveys to gauge farmers opinions (feelings on the issue)

3) Amount of money spent in agricultural areas for fertilizers, pesticides etc.

4) Number of livestock operations with waste treatment procedures, and the number of operations that have implemented those procedures.

5) Number of farming operations that have established buffer zones between land and water.

6) consumer demand for pesticide free and pesticide reduced foods. Consumer demand for antibiotic free and/or antibiotic (and other drugs) reduced livestock.

SAFE/FAIL Policy recommendations:

1. Environmental policy should have priority over agricultural policy
2. Indicators of risk should be defined as broadly as possible
3. Indicators should be made public
4. Public awareness campaigns required to enable sound interpretation of
data released to the public. For instance, if amphibian populations are
declining, what does it mean?
5. Increase efforts to quanitify social costs
6. Develop and introduce techniques for accounting of these social costs.
7. Introduce the new standards into generally accepted accounting
principles (GAAP).