Introduction

In 2016, Canada’s 271,935 farm operators represented less than 0.8 per cent of the Canadian population (Statistics Canada 2017a). This reflects a loss of close to 120,000 farmers over the past 25 years as Canadian livelihoods continue to shift away from agriculture (about 1.4 per cent of the population farmed in 1991). Considering that less than 10 per cent of Canadian farmers are under the age of 35, it is hard to imagine these numbers rebounding anytime in the near future (Statistics Canada 2017a). Clearly, Canadian farming faces a generational challenge (Qualman et al. 2018). However, despite these generational challenges, there has been little research that focuses specifically on young farmers in Canada and their experiences in becoming “successful” farmers. Therefore, the purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of the information available on Canadian young farmers. This overview references existing research from scholarly literature and government statistics. This is done to offer an understanding of the context within which Canada’s young farmers are embedded. A young person’s desire to farm is partly shaped by but also shapes their experiences in becoming and being a young farmer. This overview helps inform the discussion in the next two chapters that are based upon interviews with young farmers in our two case study provinces: Ontario and Manitoba.

In this chapter, we argue that if there is to be a generational renewal on Canada’s farms, challenges facing young farmers will need to be overcome. Such an undertaking requires listening to the voices of young farmers and providing public support that addresses the different needs of both newcomer and returning young farmers (defined below). We begin by describing the agrarian context in Canada in Section “Canada’s Agrarian Context,” focusing specifically on farming in Ontario and Manitoba, the two provinces selected for our case studies. Section “The Constraints to Becoming a Young Farmer” focuses on the constraints facing young farmers entering farming. It does this by examining whether there are common characteristics among those young people who enter farming before exploring their aspirations for farming, their pathways into farming, and some of the specific challenges that they face. Section “Being a Young Farmer” examines the experiences of those who have become farmers. The concluding section provides a segue into the next two chapters, offering description and analysis of in-depth interviews with nearly 100 young farmers in Ontario and Manitoba.

We start by defining a farmer, a farm operator, a young farmer, a newcomer farmer, and a returning farmer. These terms are described differently across regions and literature; providing clear definitions improves the ease of comparison between existing work and the research presented here and in the next two chapters.

Farmers and Farm Operators

The terms “farmer” and “farm operator” can be used interchangeably. Statistics Canada uses the term “farm operator,” as “those persons responsible for the management decisions in operating an agricultural operation. These can be owners, tenants or hired managers of the agricultural operation, including those responsible for management decisions pertinent to particular aspects of the farm—planting, harvesting, raising animals, marketing and sales, and making capital purchases and other financial decisions.” A given farm can have up to three farm operators and these can be women or men, including youth (Statistics Canada 2019a).

Statistics Canada changed its definition of farm operators prior to the 1991 Census of Agriculture. These changes make farm operator data from previous Censuses incomparable. The agency explains:

Prior to the 1991 Census, the farm operator referred to only one person who was responsible for the day-to-day decisions made in the operation of an agricultural holding. Because only one operator was listed for each census farm, the number of operators was the same as the number of census farms. Beginning in 1991, up to three operators per operation could be listed on the questionnaire. (Statistics Canada 2019a)

Young Farmer

The age of young farmers interviewed for this study ranged from 18 to 45 years old. This age range is inconsistent with Statistics Canada data on farm operators, which is often reported using three broad age segments: 15–34; 35–54; and 55 and older. We believe that it is important to include some “older” young farmers in our study—farmers who are still young enough to remember their experiences as young farmers but who might be further along in their journey towards becoming a successful farmer. However, where this chapter uses Statistics Canada data, it refers exclusively to the 15–34 age range.

Newcomer and Returning Farmers

Drawing on the work of Monllor (2012), we separated our young farmers into two broad categories: newcomers and returning farmers. A “newcomer” is a young farmer who is farming now but did not grow up on a farm or benefit from having a family farm from which to launch their career. This is in contrast to a “returning” farmer who grew up on a farm and whose farming career was in some way tied to their family’s farm. These two types of young farmers are not distinct dichotomies; for example, a returning farmer may exit from farming for a significant period of time before returning and may not be involved with their family’s farm. Nonetheless, there are enough similarities within each group as to make these categories useful.

Canada’s Agrarian Context

According to the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Canada is the seventh largest country in the world by arable land area, with just under 3 per cent of the world’s total arable land. In 2018, it produced 1.1 per cent of the gross value of the world’s agricultural output, measured in constant terms (FAOSTAT 2021). Following the 2016 census, the Canadian agri-food system accounted for 6.7 per cent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The agri-food system represented about 12.5 per cent of Canadian employment, and about 1.6 per cent of Canadians are employed as farm operators (Statistics Canada 2017d). Canada produces a range of agricultural products across its many diverse landscapes. With ports on the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, a rail system across the country, and a shared land border with one of the largest economies in the world, Canada is well positioned to engage in global agri-food markets.

As a result, it is not surprising that for more than 25 years, the foundation of Canadian government agricultural policy has been the export maximization of agri-food products produced for global markets. The narrative that both federal and provincial governments have advanced is one of Canada as a top-tier food exporter—the country must contribute to feeding the world, and if it succeeds in increasing exports, everyone benefits. While Canadian farmers have helped the government to meet ambitious export expansion targets, this period has also been associated with fewer farmers, fewer local processors, and increased consolidation along national supply chains. Some 17 per cent of all cash receipts in Canada’s agricultural sector in 2017 were accounted for by the supply-managed sector, in which farmers must hold a quota, a form of permit that provides a per unit licence to produce and sell a specific level of output and which is set by national agencies (Heminthavong 2018). Dairy, chicken and turkey products, broiler hatching eggs, and table eggs are all subject to supply management. As production for global markets requires that commodities be relatively homogeneous across farms and countries, agriculture tends to focus on efficiency, consistency, and standardization. For farmers, this encourages expansion in those commodities where there are significant economies of scale, in order to be price competitive. Globally competitive markets in many agricultural products result in thin margins between farm gate prices and cost of production. This is in stark contrast to a more local food supply chain, where producers have a strong relationship with their processors and the people who eat the food that they produce. Over time, Canada’s focus on efficiency, consistency, and the global market has marginalized local food supply chains. This has continued despite a renewed interest in and demand from customers for rebuilding local food supply chains.

Just as the agri-food markets for Canadian farmers have changed, so too have demographics. Between 1991 and 2016, the average age of a Canadian farmer increased from 47.5 to 55, and more than 54 per cent of Canadian farmers are now older than 55 (Statistics Canada 2017a). Improvements in technology have reduced the sector’s dependence on physical labour, which may be enabling some farmers to extend the length of their careers. However, delayed retirement may also be due to the financial challenges that have emerged out of their participation in a stringently price-competitive global market (Qualman et al. 2018) as well as the challenges that farmers face in developing plans for the future of their farm when the value of farm properties has dramatically increased (discussed later in this chapter). Not only are farmers trying to construct a way to finance their retirement, they also want to treat their non-farming children fairly while leaving enough money for the farm to remain viable for future generations. This is not easy to do as farming businesses tend to have little liquid cash (Qualman et al. 2018); most of the total net worth of a farm is tied up in land and non-land assets that are needed for the farm to operate and cannot be easily sold to support retirement or non-farming children.

The traditions associated with farm management and intergenerational succession are also changing. Many women raised on a farm who want to continue farming seek the same opportunities to farm as their brothers and their brothers’ peers. This is in contrast to previous generations where the farm was conventionally passed on to the oldest son. Notwithstanding this, however, the proportion of women operators is still significantly lower than men and has only marginally increased, from 25 per cent in 1991 to 28 per cent in 2016 (Ainley 2013; Statistics Canada 2017a). In addition to women being underrepresented within the overall farm operator population, there are also disproportionately fewer young farmers in Canada within the overall farm operator population. In 2016, less than 10 per cent of Canadian farmers were under the age of 35 (Statistics Canada 2017a). Figure 2.1 presents a beehive graph that offers a detailed picture of the ages and genders of Canadian farmers. The length of each horizontal bar represents the number of farmers in a specific one-year age category. Farmers aged 15 are at the bottom and those aged 90 are at the top. Note the shift upward on both sides of the graph—the dramatic shift upward in the age profiles of both women and men farmers in Canada. The loss of young farmers is plainly visible (Figs. 2.2 and 2.3).

Canada is a settler-colonial country and throughout its history has relied on immigration to increase its population. While historically a significant share of immigrants entered farming, particularly from the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, that is less in evidence contemporarily. In the 2016 Census of Agriculture immigrants comprised 8.7 per cent of Canadian farm operators, or 23,440 people (Statistics Canada 2019b). The main source of immigrant farmers in Canada were the United States and China. Interestingly, in 2016 nearly a quarter of American immigrants to Canada who entered farming did so from an urban background and were thus newcomers to farming. Some 53.8 per cent of US farm immigrants to Canada were women, and the average age of American farm immigrants was 47.3. Typically, American farm immigrants are involved in beef cattle farming or in activities to support beef cattle farming, both of which influence the size of farm of American farm immigrants, which was, on average, 628.6 acres. More than 40 per cent of American farm immigrants relied on an off-farm income. By way of contrast, almost three-quarters of Chinese farm immigrants were men, the average age of Chinese farm immigrants was 45.1, and more than half were located in Ontario. Typically, Chinese farm immigrants are involved in greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture production, their farms average 360.2 acres, and no Chinese farm immigrant reported an off-farm income. Having said that, for both American and Chinese farm immigrants, average total income was at $33,321 and $13,627, respectively, low. However, perhaps most importantly, immigrants have comprised a declining share of the Canadian farm operator population since 1996, and only 1.7 per cent of Canadian farm operators arrived in the country between 2011 and 2016 (Statistics Canada 2019b), suggesting that immigration is no longer a driver of Canadian farm demographics. This decline has occurred alongside the sector continuing to rely on temporary foreign workers through the official Seasonal Agricultural Workers Program, which grew from recruiting 264 Jamaicans to Ontario in 1966 to more than 40,000 workers from Mexico and English-speaking island nations in the Caribbean in ten Canadian provinces by 2018 (Leigh Binford 2019).

While these trends are consistent across all of Canada’s provinces, Ontario and Manitoba were chosen for our research because they each have their own unique agrarian context. Ontario is Canada’s most populated province and accounts for 26 per cent of Canada’s farmers and 15.5 per cent of Canada’s agricultural land (Connell et al. 2016). Most of Ontario’s agriculture is located in the southern part of the province, near the Great Lakes. A temperate, humid climate combined with quality soil, access to major American markets, and proximity to urban centres make Ontario a desirable place to farm. Compared to Manitoba, Ontario also has significantly more poultry, swine, and dairy farmers. Livestock can allow farmers to successfully operate on significantly smaller land bases given that they are not solely dependent on cropping income. All of these traits are reflected in higher average land prices (US$8459Footnote 1 per acre) than found in other provinces and smaller average farm sizes (249 acres) than those found in the prairie provinces (Statistics Canada 2019c). While these geospatial characteristics make farming favourable in southern Ontario, the region’s comparatively higher population density also creates more opportunities for farmers’ off-farm employment. In Ontario as a whole, off-farm income accounted for 78.6 per cent of total income among farmers in 2013 (Statistics Canada 2014). This income stream may slow down the loss of farmers as smaller operations are able to supplement their farm revenue with income from other jobs. Furthermore, proximity to urban centres and large populations may make southern Ontario a good candidate for new and existing farmers who are looking to avoid conventional commodity-based supply chains and instead market their food directly to local customers.

Manitoba is immediately west of Ontario and is one of Canada’s three prairie provinces. With about 1.4 million people compared to Ontario’s 14.6 million, Manitoba is much smaller than southern Ontario. Moreover, 62 per cent of the population live in Manitoba’s capital city of Winnipeg (City of Winnipeg 2020). Notwithstanding this urbanized population distribution, farmers make up only about 3 per cent of Manitoba’s workforce, while Manitoba has 11.4 per cent of Canada’s total agricultural land (Connell et al. 2016). The average farm size in Manitoba is close to 1200 acres—significantly larger than Ontario (Government of Manitoba 2017). Although larger, Manitoba’s farms are worth about one-fifth of the price of an Ontario farm, with farmland having an average value of C$2193 per acre (Statistics Canada 2019c). Most of Manitoba’s farmland is seeded with wheat or canola (Statistics Canada 2022)—commodity crops for global agri-food markets. As in Ontario, Manitoba farmers rely on off-farm income, earning about 70 per cent of their total income from off-farm work, which is less than Ontario or the national average (Statistics Canada 2014). Far fewer urban areas and larger farm sizes make Manitoba less amenable to production for local food markets, although when farms have proximity to Winnipeg, this does present opportunities for some farmers to direct market.

The Constraints to Becoming a Young Farmer

Most young farmers fit into one of two broad groups: returning farmers and newcomers. Then there are, of course, those who never leave the farm. These groups can have different aspirations and motivations to farm, may be exposed to different opportunities to farm, could have different goals for their farms, might deploy different resources as they follow different pathways into farming, and face different challenges as farm operators. Cumulatively, the experiences of returning and newcomer young farmers can be profoundly different. In what follows, aspects of these different experiences are explored through a discussion of farming aspirations, pathways into farming, and constraints on farming.

Aspirations

Martz and Brueckner (2003) found that 120 of the 200 youth that they interviewed across Canada who grew up on a farm would continue to farm if given the opportunity, even as most acknowledged the challenges that can result from a farming career. More recent reports provide glimpses into a continued interest in farming (Xiong 2017). Indeed, it is not difficult to find testimonies from young people who grew up on farms and who say that, since they could remember, they wanted to be farmers, providing the basis of what is defined above as returning farmers:

There’s a lot of us that it’s a born and bred passion. It’s the reason I get up in the morning. We just love what we do … There’s a lot of dignity that goes with farming. I think it’s an honest way to make a living.—Young male farmer (RealAgriculture 2014)

We wouldn’t work 16 and 18 hour days in the spring if we didn’t love what we do.—Young female dairy farmer from Ontario (Farm and Food Care 2014a)

For those who grew up around farming, it is seen as a career that is stimulating and satisfying (CBC News: The National 2017)—a profession that comes with intrinsic rewards for successfully navigating the vagaries that accompany a life as a farmer. This includes building and honing a unique blend of physical and intellectual skills, at different points during the year being not only a farmer but also an accountant, a heavy-machinery operator, a mechanic, a botanist, a scientist, a chemist, a labourer, a marketer, and a manager of people (National Farmers Union 2007, 17).

The motivations for newcomer farmers differ in that they often compare the enjoyment that they receive from farming with the ennui that their former profession generated. Leonard (2015) and Haalboom (2013) studied young first-generation farmers who founded small-scale alternative farms (e.g. organic and biodynamic). Leonard (2015) studied four farms in Manitoba, and Haalboom (2013) interviewed eight farmers in Nova Scotia. Participating young farmers often contrasted farming with their old urban occupations:

I wanted to do something different …. I was tired of getting dressed up in the morning to go sit in an office, and I just felt like I was part of a rat race heading towards a finish line I had not consciously chosen. I mean, there’s the expression, ‘Even if you win the rat race, you’re still a rat.’—Young sheep farmer from Nova Scotia (Haalboom 2013, 29)

I’ve contrasted this [farming] from cubicle life and screen-oriented work. I’ve learned the satisfaction of growing and doing. With manual labour I get to integrate mind, body and spirit. It’s important to have dirt under your fingernails.—Young small-scale organic farmer from Manitoba (Leonard 2015, 72)

I really enjoy not having a boss of any kind, basically having a completely open schedule and all our time is our own, not dictated by anyone else …. There is no separation between life and work, it’s all the same thing, and it all happens here at the farm.—Young organic vegetable farmer from Nova Scotia (Haalboom 2013, 35)

I hated being inside with my job in summer. I couldn’t do it.—Young small-scale organic farmer from Manitoba (Leonard 2015, 89)

While farming is a difficult profession, these testimonies from newcomer young farmers suggest that there are likely to be significant numbers of young Canadians who aspire to farm. Nonetheless, despite this aspiration, the number of young farmers in Canada has been decreasing over time. To understand this decline, it is helpful to examine the experiences of current young farmers, specifically in understanding the pathways into how young people become successful farmers.

Education and Training

The first pathway into becoming successful at anything is learning how to do it. Young farmers, by their own admission, benefit tremendously from agricultural education and training (Robinson 2003; Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2010; Roessler 2005). In focus interviews with seven young farmers in Manitoba, Durnin (2010, 111) notes that “learning and the importance of keeping oneself up-to-date was mentioned by all participants” when asked to identify the factors critical to their success as farmers (see also House of Commons Canada 2010). In their Canada-wide survey, Martz and Brueckner (2003) found that, on average, farmers access eight sources of agricultural information: talking to others, attending meetings, readings newsletters, attending agricultural fairs, reading on the internet, television, reading newspapers and books, and meeting with or attending training sessions given by government extension officers and industry representatives. In terms of education and training modalities, young farmers prefer hands-on and practical training, learning from other farmers and in situations where they can observe different practices (Roessler 2005; House of Commons Canada 2010; Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2010; Laforge 2017). Examples of these types of education and training include intensive short courses or workshops focused on aspects of farm management such as crop production or financial management as well as farmer field days and hands-on training or internships in specific aspects of farm operations. In general, most studies find that access to farmer training and educational materials is not a major barrier for young farmers: the opportunities to access training and education are, in general, available to those who want it (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2010; Dennis 2015; Ekers et al. 2016).

Nonetheless, it is clear from the literature that young farmers with a farming background—returning farmers and those who never left—and those without a farming background—newcomers—have different education and training needs. For those from a farming background, growing up on a farm and helping parents with day-to-day decisions and farm chores provided tacit and practical agricultural knowledge (Martz and Brueckner 2003; Lobley et al. 2010) as well as agro-ecological knowledge that is specific to the farm (National Farmers Union 2007; Uchiyama et al. 2008). Yet practical “learning by doing” does not take place only on the farm. Many young returning farmers have a favourable view of working off-farm for a couple of years in the agricultural sector (e.g. in marketing or agronomy roles), viewing it as an opportunity to gain valuable experience in the broader sector while also saving to support future farming plans (Robinson 2003; Ahearn 2016). Young returning farmers also see the value in post-secondary agricultural education, although it is not normally ranked as highly as practical, hands-on training (Robinson 2003; Durnin 2010; Monllor 2012).

Newcomers who did not grow up on a farm have somewhat different training and educational requirements, at least initially. This is especially so if they want to use alternative farming practices (Ekers et al. 2016; Laforge 2017). As Knibb (2012, 12) concludes after surveying 436 new entrants to farming in Ontario, 61 per cent of whom were under the age of 40, “Entry-level practitioners often have little, if any, farming experience.” Lacking the hands-on training and accumulation of tacit knowledge that those who grow up on a farm normally receive during their youth, and lacking access to family members who could act as farm mentors, newcomers must purposefully invest in practical farmer training and consciously seek out mentors (Epps 2017). Young newcomers who do not follow conventional, commodity-focused farming practices emphasize hands-on learning through farmer-to-farmer education, such as internships and fields days, rather than formal education or government extension services, which are in general not geared to the needs of small-scale farming (Knibb 2012; Laforge 2017). Indeed, the popularity of unpaid internships on alternative farms in Canada may be a response to the need for practical hands-on training and a result of the lack of formal programmes specializing in alternative agriculture at educational institutions (Ekers and Levoke 2016; Ekers et al. 2016). In research undertaken in 1991–1992 with 203 organic and conventional farmers in southern Ontario and British Columbia, Egri (1999) found that organic farmers, who tend to be younger than farmers producing for commodity markets, are much less likely to use the traditional sources of information that more conventional farmers relied upon, such as government publications, extension agents, and input suppliers such as seed representatives and company agronomists. Instead, they tended to rely upon farm organizations and farmer-to-farmer learning opportunities to a much greater degree. Roessler (2005), in a survey of 14 alternative farmers in British Columbia, found that organic farmers strongly prefer training resources or educational materials tailored to their specific farming region, perceiving these kinds of materials as most applicable to their own farm. Testimonials from the literature reinforce the point:

Farmers learn best from other farmers. We were learning from other farmers in Manitoba; some who were just getting into agriculture, and some who were grain farmers but were sympathetic to what we were doing.—Small-scale organic farmer from Manitoba (Leonard 2015, 77)

[Sharing knowledge has] always been a strong value because that’s how I learned. I think that the mentors in our community, the farmers we learned from, are very into sharing knowledge and encouraging new farmers to get into it.—Small-scale organic farmer from British Columbia (Roessler 2005, 54)

… the vast majority of the resources that I look at [on the internet] are American university extension services … I’m glad that it’s there, but it just may not be at all applicable! It’s a long way away, different ecology, different climate …—Organic farmer from British Columbia (Roessler 2005, 54)

These quotations demonstrate the importance of the local agricultural community as a source of information, education, and training for young farmers engaged in alternative agricultural practices.

Land

To become a farmer inevitably requires access to farmland. Both Dennis (2015) and Leonard (2015) report that the desire to start a farm becomes more difficult to sustain when there is no clear route to accessing farmland. This becomes the most binding constraint on establishing a pathway into farming (Qualman et al. 2018). In interviews with 35 young Albertan farmers (35 years of age or younger or those with less than 10 years of experience farming), Robinson (2003) found that the most common farming challenge identified was a small land base and an inability to expand due to high farmland prices, which have been increasing across Canada since 1993 (Farm Credit Canada 2016b). Access to land has become the most important barrier facing young farmers, particularly for new entrants to farming who cannot access land through family succession (Robinson 2003; Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2010; Dennis 2015). Thus, in a May 2017 report, Statistics Canada noted, “In 2016 the average value of land and buildings was C$2,696 per acre, which is an increase of 38.8% from 2011 (in 2016 constant dollars).” In part, well-documented increased investor ownership of farmland has driven rising prices (Holtslander 2015; Desmarais et al. 2017), in addition to farmland concentration among fewer farmers (Qualman et al. 2020). At present, Canadian farmland affordability, which can be defined by the ratio of land price to the net agricultural returns that the land can generate, is so low that a young farmer cannot hope to service the debt that they would be required to take on to purchase even a small farm (Qualman et al. 2018).

With farmland ownership being out of the reach of many young farmers, both new entrants and those taking over the family farm are increasingly relying on rented land or alternative land use arrangements such as cooperative ownership, land trusts, and farming public lands (Dennis 2015). Thus, Statistics Canada notes that “young farmers [are] more likely to rent land” than to own it: “Of agricultural operations where all operators were under the age of 35, 50.6% rented land from others, compared with 35.1% of all agricultural operations. On agricultural operations that used only rented land, the average operator age was 46.0 years, 9 years younger than the national average” (Statistics Canada 2017a).

However, while renting might be a good option for returning farmers, finding rented land can be more challenging for new farmers who do not have extensive networks in the agricultural community. This is particularly true for young farmers from urban centres or those who need only a fraction of the land that is often being offered for rent; for example, those who only need between 1 and 5 acres of land when parcels are typically a minimum of 50 acres. In this light, it is perhaps not surprising that in an online survey of 430 Ontario farmers, of whom 61 per cent were under the age of 40, Knibb (2012) found that 70 per cent of respondents wanted to learn more about alternative land tenure options because conventional pathways to accessing farmland through purchase or rental were no longer perceived to be accessible. By way of contrast, certain ecological practices such as conservation tillage, fallowing, and crop rotation are most practically applied on larger land bases. Young farmers who can access enough land to operate a smaller farm can then be disadvantaged because unaffordable land means that they may not be able to get to the economies of scale necessary to implement the kinds of agricultural practices that they want to use (Davey and Furtan 2008; Monllor 2012).

Farm Succession

For young people who grew up on a family farm, the challenges involved in accessing land could potentially be overcome by acquiring the existing family farm. However, the process of one generation transferring ownership of the farm to the next is rarely a straightforward affair. Many studies find that farm succession can be emotionally and financially difficult and, therefore, farm succession planning is often avoided (Uchiyama et al. 2008; Pitts et al. 2009). Although informal dinner table conversations with family members about the future of the farm occur on many Canadian farm operations (Taylor et al. 1998), successfully transferring the farm to the next generation requires forethought and planning (Durnin 2010; Brown 2011; Kirkpatrick 2013). Statistics Canada (2017e) reports that only 8 per cent of Canadian farms have a formal succession planFootnote 2 in place. In a survey of 33 farmers in Haldimand Country, Ontario, Earls (2017) found that 45 per cent of surveyed farmers had no succession plan at all. The widespread inattention to this important step has resulted in much more difficult intergenerational farm transfers in Canada. In part, the avoidance of succession planning can reflect the interpersonal challenges and financial challenges that complicate such planning. An older farmer from Ontario shared: “As a mom of four children, I want a succession plan that comes away with the two older children that are not involved [in the farm] still feeling valued, still feeling they are an integral part of the family. And yet, not doing so at the expense of the farm business [taken over by two younger children]. In other words, fair is not always equal” (AMI 2013a).

In this light, it is not surprising that most Canadian studies conclude that farm succession processes can be stressful for both retiring and succeeding generations. For many farmers, farming is not a job but a vocation. This makes it difficult for farmers to think about, let alone decide, to retire. As it is a vocation, even when the decision to retire has been made, most Canadian farmers never intend to fully retire from farming. This creates a (potentially long) period of time when both older and younger generations work side-by-side. While this has the potential for great outcomes (Ferrier et al. 2013), “the prolonged period of intergenerational involvement may pose problems for family relationships” (Taylor et al. 1998, 554). An older grain and oilseed farmer from Ontario explained:

The most difficult thing for me has been to give up control. And I understand that several of my peers going through the same process have the same problem. But if the business is going to continue to succeed, someone else has to be at the helm and take charge and control. I believe I still play a significant part in the [farm] business, but I am not the leader of the charge anymore. (AMI Ontario 2013b)

A farm is a system where one decision can impact the entire direction that the farm is headed. The challenge comes when two farmers have different ideas about the future of the farm.

[Son] came home from college knowing it all and with the attitude that I knew nothing. And I looked at him as wet behind the ears, knowing nothing. It took a number of years of mellowing for us both in order to work it out.—Older Canadian farmer (Taylor et al. 1998, 564)

We argued a lot more the first five to six years than we do now. It was a power struggle because who’s going to be boss?—Older Canadian farmer (Taylor et al. 1998, 563)

Taylor et al. (1998) found that these kinds of intergenerational bargaining struggles last several years and are resolved once the older generation relinquishes management responsibility to the younger generation. In other words, once control is given to the successor, both parents and children report that intergenerational conflicts are alleviated. Yet even after management control is relinquished, the older generation normally stays involved on the farm, helping out with non-physical tasks such as driving tractors and combines or keeping financial records.

Given how easily family conflicts can arise in succession planning, it may be psychologically easier for older generations to delay tough decisions, maintaining the status quo by making no formal plans for succession. As a result, however, their children remain uncertain about their future (Pitts et al. 2009; Kirkpatrick 2013). It is likely then that many young people, especially from farm families, may be delaying their entry into full-time farming, a situation that perpetuates the idea of a “generational crisis” in Canadian agriculture. Anecdotally, many young people who grew up on “smallish-medium” sized farms opt out of trying to farm right after their schooling in order to avoid some of the conflict and stress (that comes with wanting to be financially dependent on the farm) and allow themselves to build some personal stability before trying to navigate the process of incorporating the family farm into their “actual” workload. That is not to say that they do not help, but at this point they would not consider themselves farmers either.

Another reason that farm succession processes can be stressful is that retiring farmers prioritize varied and potentially conflicting goals (Wasney 1992; Uchiyama et al. 2008; Brown 2011). In a survey of 225 Manitoba farmers, Wasney (1992) found that the retiring generation normally has four goals in succession planning: they would like enough wealth or income to support their desired lifestyle during retirement; they want to ensure the continuation of the family farm; they want to maintain good family relationships; and they want to provide financial assistance to both farming and non-farming children. Some of these goals are not always compatible, and the dramatic rise in the price of farmland may have created further incompatibilities across these goals (Su 2017).

Succession planning challenges are not insurmountable (Brown 2011; Su 2017), but they certainly reinforce the need for a formal succession plan, tailored to the specific needs of the family and created with the help of professionals so that it is in place years or decades before the farm transfer occurs (Kirkpatrick 2013). Formal succession planning gives older farmers the best chance to achieve their retirement goals and gives younger farmers the stability that they need when they take responsibility for running the family farm on their own. Yet the potential for intra-family conflicts and the difficulties that farmers may have in achieving both a financially secure retirement and a farm transition that does not overburden the next generation can be a major source of stress on Canadian farms.

Financial Viability

In their testimony, young farmers showed their love for farming; they appreciate the lifestyle. Nevertheless, this passion alone is not sufficient to convince them to set up in agriculture. They consider it first and foremost as a business that must be profitable.—Federal Parliamentary Committee, which interviewed 132 farmers in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. (House of Commons Canada 2010, 7)

In this light, the well-documented problems of low net farm incomes and significant inequalities in the distribution of net farm incomes (Qualman et al. 2018) can act as a major constraint on establishing a pathway into farming for young farmers. Moreover, insufficient net farm income can force the exit of young farmers. Statistics Canada provides income information for Canadian farmers broken down by age, using combined data from the Census of Agriculture and the National Household Survey. The Census of Agriculture is released every five years and targets all farms in Canada. The National Household Survey was released only in 2011, sampling about 30 per cent of Canadian households drawn from a random subsample of those completing the 2011 Canadian census. As such, 2011 is the only year where farm income is broken down by age, using Statistics Canada’s definition of a young farmer as those under 35. A summary of the relevant figures is provided in Table 2.1. According to Table 2.1, farms operated by young farmers tend to generate less net income than those operated by older farmers (Statistics Canada 2011a). For Canadian farm operators under 35 years old, 25 per cent had net farm incomes of C$50,000 or greater compared to 35 per cent of operators between 35 and 55 years of age and 27 per cent of operators 55 or older (Statistics Canada 2011a). Data for Ontario and Manitoba are similar to the rest of Canada. In Ontario, 24 per cent of operators under 35 earned at least C$50,000 versus 36 per cent of farm operators between 35 and 55. In Manitoba, these figures are 27 per cent and 36 per cent, respectively (Statistics Canada 2011a).

Table 2.2 presents relevant figures from Statistics Canada (2011b) on the major sources of income for farm operators by age. While most farmers earn the majority of their income from off-farm or non-farm sources regardless of age, younger farmers are more reliant on non-farm income sources (Statistics Canada 2011b). In 2011, about 21 per cent of farmers under 35 years old earned the majority of their income from their farm operation, compared to 24 per cent for farmers between 35 and 55 years old (Statistics Canada 2011b). Wages and salaries were the most common main source of income for farm operators under 35 or between 35 and 55. Over half of farm operators derived most of their income from off-farm or non-farm work in these age categories (Statistics Canada 2011b). For farm operators 55 years or older, sources of retirement income such as pensions or investment income from registered retirement savings plans is the main income source for 40 per cent of farm operators. Only about 20 per cent of farmers 55 and over earn most of their income from their farm operation. In Ontario and Manitoba, the picture is similar to the rest of Canada. In these provinces, 24 per cent and 22 per cent of young farmers, respectively, earn the majority of their net income from farming. This compares to provincial averages of 24 per cent and 30 per cent for farmers aged 35–55 in Ontario and Manitoba (Statistics Canada 2011b). One of the problems in generating sufficient net farm income is that farming requires access to assets (such as land, buildings, and equipment) to grow farm products. Typically, acquiring these assets and the associated inputs (seed, fertilizer, feed, etc.) require access to working capital and credit (Robinson 2003; Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2010; Pouliot 2011; Junior Farmers of Ontario 2013; Food Secure Canada 2015; Laforge 2016). Conducting interviews with six key informants, both young farmers and researchers, in British Columbia, Gichungwa (2015) reported that after access to land, lack of capital and the difficulties associated with accessing credit were the most important barriers to beginning to farm. A similar finding is reported from a Canada-wide survey with 1326 new farmers, the majority of who were in the age group 26–35 (Laforge 2016). Most young farmers do not have access to the financing available through banks or credit unions, who prefer to deal with more experienced farmers with credit histories and access to collateral such as land (Murphy 2012; Epps 2017). A Junior Farmers of Ontario survey (2013) of 250 young farmers found that only 27 per cent of respondents accessed lines of credit through traditional financial institutions, and most of those farmers had farm experience, suggesting that this is a specific challenge that newcomers can face. Most young farmers relied on personal savings (53 per cent) and financial support from their extended family (29 per cent) to fund asset purchases (Junior Farmers of Ontario 2013). Having said that, in many provinces, small seed grants are available to young and beginning farmers (FarmStart 2016; Epps 2017), and young farmers generally express support for Farm Credit Canada (FCC) (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2010), a federal crown corporation that has a specific loan programme for young farmers, the FCC Young Farmer Loan (FCC 2016a). Conversely, as Leonard (2015) mentions, some young farmers engaged in alternative agriculture to eschew traditional farm entry that relies on debt, preferring options that grant greater autonomy, such as community-supported agriculture, direct support from customers, and personal savings from off-farm work.

The supply-managed sub-sectors in Canadian agriculture (dairy, poultry, and eggs) provide a unique example of how capital and net farm incomes are intertwined for Canada’s young farmers. By managing supply in the market, these sectors are designed to support sufficient farmgate prices for producers. However, the resulting income security from these sectors has significantly inflated the prices of the production quotas that are needed to produce these agricultural products. A production quota provides a per unit licence to produce, and these quotas have become very expensive. The cost of quotas presents a major barrier to farm expansion, but also to new entrants. For some perspective, a 2012 study by University of Calgary researchers (Findlay 2012) found that to own a single cow, a Canadian farmer would need $28,000 worth of quota. While they support strong operating incomes (income before taxes, interest, etc.), accessing the financing to acquire these quotas poses a challenge for young farmers. While most supply management organizations have special programmes to help beginning farmers obtain quotas through low interest loans, there are limitations to the quotas available and the number of entrants accepted to this programme annually (Mitchell 2015; Dairy Farmers of Ontario 2021; Chicken Farmers of Ontario 2017).

Creating Social Networks

For returning farmers, the succession process can provide a major means through which they enter into and create the social networks necessary to sustain their farm operation. As the young farmer begins to take over various responsibilities and decision making, they start to develop their own relationships with input suppliers, purchasers, and advisors, and they find their own way to fit into the local community, building upon the social networks that their parents established.

For newcomers, however, the creation of social networks can be more challenging. When young people move to a new rural community to start farming, they face the task of building such support networks of like-minded farmers for guidance and mentorship from scratch (Roessler 2005; Ngo and Brklacich 2014; Haalboom 2013). In a study of 1480 Quebec farmers who were less than 38 years old, Parent (2012) found that 58 per cent of respondents considered themselves socially isolated and that young single farmers, who were more at-risk of social isolation than partnered farmers, felt that farming made it more difficult to find a spouse. Conversely, Ngo and Brklacich (2014), surveying nine new farmers in Ontario from urban backgrounds, of whom six were young, found that while most respondents indicated that developing a sense of community in their new rural locale was challenging, most felt they were making progress in establishing their social lives and developing a sense of place.

Being a Young Farmer

Newcomer Farmers: Farming as a Political Act

For newcomers, their social and environmental views provide a strong motivation to start farming. They also provide a strong reason to continue to farm even when the farm operation itself is only marginally profitable or if “profit” is not the primary goal of their farm operation (Wilson 2015; Ekers et al. 2016). Small qualitative studies from across Canada consistently find that young first-generation farmers see agriculture as a way of building an alternative agricultural economy, one that promotes social justice, environmental stewardship, healthy food, and prioritizes meeting local and regional food needs (Mills 2013; Wilson 2015; Laforge 2017). Young farmers seek to live out environmental and social values that they find important, gaining a sense of place and of purpose from agriculture that they would not receive from another occupation. The kinds of social and environmental values that motivate young newcomer farmers reflect how they see themselves fitting into—or rather not fitting into—the dominant agricultural paradigm of high-input, capital-intensive, and export-oriented farming (Laforge 2017).

In this light, it is perhaps not surprising that most of Haalboom’s eight research subjects had university degrees, but in non-agricultural subjects (Haalboom 2013). Laforge (2017, 218) notes that of 1326 respondents, who had an average age of 37, “many … had an education in environmental studies or work experience with social justice organizations.” They saw their farming activities as a political act, as a way of challenging the dominant agricultural and indeed social paradigm by living as an example. So, it comes as little surprise that according to one farmer in Leonard’s study, “We think about social justice as our lifestyle, not as being organizers of a movement” (2015, 83).

Interestingly, while newcomer young farmers place a great deal of intrinsic value on the land that they farm, the fact that they often lack secure tenure on the farmland that they operate because of its unaffordability means that for some, their personal relationship to land is not to a specific parcel of land. Thus, young farmers in Dennis’ study indicate that their insecure tenure meant that they could not form deep attachments to the land that they operated because there was an ever-present threat of losing their lease (2015, 63). Having said that, studying 10 small-scale organic farmers in eastern Ontario and western Quebec, Wilson (2015) found that some participants talked about the tangible and intangible benefits they derived from owning a farm:

Every day and every year I love more and more this land that we live on. I can’t really even explain it but it just grows and grows often time; the relationship with the land. Having grown up here, I just love being here …—Young Canadian organic farmer (Wilson 2015, 119)

I felt that was important to me in terms of long-term stewardship and also good investment of my own personal resources [to buy land for an organic farm] …. And investing in land felt like a great way to have some sort of financial security but more importantly, have a connection to a location where I see it as a responsibility [to] me personally.—Young Canadian organic farmer (Wilson 2015, 121)

When newcomers struggle with profitability, as many do, Leonard (2015) found that young alternative farmers in his sample used off-farm labour to supplement on-farm income, concluding that this strategy may be a way for these farmers to remain autonomous in the face of a corporate-controlled food system. Young farmers were also generating additional income through the value-added processing of agricultural products grown on-farm (Ahearn 2016). The majority of the young alternative farmers who Leonard (2015) and Laforge (2017) surveyed sold value-added processed products (e.g. sausages, salsa, and sauces) made from their own produce. In Manitoba, Durnin (2010) found that value-added processing of on-farm products is a common side business of young farmers, and in remote rural areas, one of the few avenues available to earn additional income.

As they wish to challenge the prevailing parameters of the food system through the way that they live, newcomer alternative young farmers have argued that current Canadian agricultural policies do not support those who want to start small-scale farms. In country-wide roundtable discussions with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, many young farmers have opined that Canadian agricultural policy disproportionally favours one “model” of agriculture (Agriculture and Agri-food Canada 2010). Several participants suggested that most government programmes that are geared towards young farmers are targeted at those who are starting or taking over large-scale farms producing for commodity markets, with a lack of programming that supports different models of production. This finding was echoed in separate consultations with young farmers that the Canadian Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food conducted (House of Commons Canada 2010). One young farmer recounts:

The government’s rules and regulations do not always have the small-scale producer in mind and discriminate against them in many ways. Our guarantee to you is that our food is safe and we eat it as well. My parents eat our food, my children eat our food. We have more and stronger reasons for food safety than any regulation could possibly capture. (Leonard 2015, 44)

It is these personal guarantees of relationships with eaters, safety, and hence quality that set newcomers and local food systems apart from commodity-based agriculture. For the most part, it is very rarely the case that newcomers produce for commodity markets. In part because of their disdain of production for commodity markets, newcomer farmers in alternative agriculture often feel somewhat marginalized by their wider rural community:

I find that even though I’ve operated a successful CSA [community supported agriculture] for 15 years, I am still not considered to be a ‘real farmer’ by my conventional neighbours.—Young biodynamic farmer (mixed crop-livestock) from Ontario (Laforge 2017, 219)

Not having community [with conventional neighbours], but then having it at the farmers market was great. People would say ‘you changed my life’ or ‘that’s the best sausage I’ve had.’ It was great affirmation.—Young small-scale organic farmer from Manitoba (Leonard 2015, 71)

I do feel a disconnect with the people out here a little bit because it’s white, very white. It’s small town. It’s a lot of industrial agriculture out here so organic agriculture out here is laughable or something.—Organic farmer from Ontario (Ngo and Brklacich 2014, 58)

I mean, even people who have done tractor work for me, will say it outright, like you’re not really a farmer, or you’re not a true Canadian farmer, backyard gardener, these sorts of things, hobby farmer …—Organic farmer from Ontario (Ngo and Brklacich 2014, 63)

These young farmers challenge the traditional notions of what it means to be a “good farmer” (e.g. large land base, weed-free fields) and swim against the cultural current in most rural communities. Being surrounded by neighbours that do not really understand them, having little support from government, and struggling with the mundane challenges of small-scale farming, Laforge (2017, 227) concludes that to sustain their motivation, new farmers engaging in alternative agriculture require “a stable framework of supportive customers and peers to reinforce their alternative self-identity in a culture dominated by productivist ideals.”

Returning Farmers: Farming as a Way of Life

Once returning farmers take over the management of the farm, it can be challenging for them to take the farm enterprise in the business direction to which they aspire. Monllor’s (2012) study of 50 young Ontario farmers found that those taking over the family farm are often locked into particular production practices, irrespective of their actual agricultural and social attitudes. Similarly, in a survey of 57 farmers, Khaledi et al. (2010) found that older Saskatchewan farmers were more likely to convert all or part of their farmland to organic production than younger farmers. This is because a radical change in agricultural production practices is more difficult when one has just taken over a farm operation and is concerned with managing the day-to-day operations of a farm, meeting any outstanding debt obligations, and maintaining arrangements with other family members that hold different views as to the business direction of the farm (Monllor 2012). Moreover, as opposed to older established farmers, many young returning farmers, struggling to stay profitable in the first few years after starting to farm (when most learning is by trial and error), encounter difficulties implementing ecological practices that may be profitable in the long run, but are difficult to sustain in the short run when cash flow, can be a major concern (Smithers and Furman 2003).

Notwithstanding these challenges, returning young farmers have broader motivations sustaining their decision to return to the farm than simply the business direction of the enterprise. In an in-depth study of three intergenerational family farms in Ontario, Ainley (2013) found that younger farmers returning to take over the family farm do so in part because they want to give their own children the upbringing that they themselves experienced growing up. Thus, for returning farmers, farming is not only seen as a career but as an intrinsically good “way of life” that has a range of non-pecuniary benefits that they want to provide to their children as they are being raised (Lobley et al. 2010).

When we started this family, I wanted the girls to have the same life that I was given … and that is being on a farm. The country life. Everything that I got to have they get to have.—Young dairy farmer from Ontario (Food and Farm Care 2015b)

The thing I love most about farming is that we can work from home, and that it is a family business … I know the work I’m doing now will affect my kids.—Poultry farmer from Ontario (Farm and Food Care 2015a)

Well I grew up here [the farm] and I didn’t really think I would be a farmer … I imagined that I’d go off to university and have some sort of professional career … It was only when I went away that I started to miss the way that I had grown up.—Young Canadian organic farmer (Wilson 2015, 147)

It is important to note though that while the “farming lifestyle” and “way of life” are often cited by farmers as a principal reason to farm, these terms are never clearly defined by study participants or authors. Indeed, it may not be possible to authoritatively define these concepts (Ikerd 2016).

Research reports and small studies consistently find that farmers and their families want to live in vibrant rural communities, where amenities such as schools, health care, and childcare are available (OECD 2006; AGree 2010; Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2010;). So, for example:

My favorite part of being a farmer [beef and cash crops] is community. Living in an agricultural area, you can get so involved … It’s just a different way of living. It’s great, the kids are raised on the farm.—Beef and cash crop farmer from Ontario (Farm and Food Care 2014c)

Dennis (2015, 42) reports that the young farmers in British Columbia who she interviewed are reluctant to move to more remote rural locations where land is considerably cheaper. In part, this may be because of a lack of vibrant rural communities with amenities, which also suggests that in part, this may be because they are concerned about the wider opportunities available in these more remote locations, such as support networks, access to markets, and the availability of off-farm employment. Ongoing farm consolidation in Canada (Qualman et al. 2018, 3) contributes to these issues as it brings an attendant decline in farm families living in rural communities and in so doing can exacerbate the declining availability of rural services. For example, in their study of four small Saskatchewan farming communities, Bacon and Brewin (2008, 1–16) found that these rural populations continue to decline as amenities such as schools, hospitals, and restaurants become less likely to remain open, which in turn makes these areas less likely to attract new migrants, including farmers. While returning farmers are familiar with the communities that surround their farm, this does not mean that they are immune to the challenges of depleting services as rural populations decline.

As just noted, smaller communities also make it more challenging for farmers to find off-farm employment, which is increasingly important as a source of income that sustains the financial viability of Canadian farms (Qualman et al. 2018). This is suggestive of the demands facing Canadian farmers and their families as they try to maintain a “farming lifestyle.” A report by Statistics Canada (Alasia and Bollman 2009) found that the probability of a farmer working off-farm peaks at around the age of 35 and declines gradually over time. In qualitative surveys, both Robinson (2003), who interviewed 35 young Albertan farmers under the age of 40, and Haalboom (2013) found that younger farmers report high rates of participation in off-farm income-generating activities and found that such income is used to subsidize the farming enterprise, support living costs, and qualify for agricultural loans.

Martz and Brueckner (2003) found that returning farmers often cite an “attachment to the land” that comprises the farm, or a responsibility towards the land (“stewardship”), as a motivation to continue farming. Given these views, it is not surprising that returning farmers are aware of the problems in the food system and as a general rule seek more responsive policies that protect them against unfair trade practices and, more broadly, the corporate control of the agri-food system. In interviews with 105 farm women across Canada, 25 of whom were under 35 years of age, Roppel et al. (2006) found that participants viewed current agricultural policies as unaccountable to most farmers and unfriendly to family farms. These participants voiced support for reorienting agricultural policies to centre on fair trade (not free trade), farmer needs (not industry needs), public control of research and food safety (not corporate control), quality food (not cheap food), and a policy environment that favours farms that produce for domestic markets and local consumption (not exports). Roundtables with young farmers find similar results: young farmers support “buy local” or “buy Canadian” food campaigns that promote domestic food consumption, demand policies that buffer farmers against the impacts of corporate monopolies in the agri-food system, and ask for fairer trade agreements and adjustments in current trade practices that place Canadian farmers at a disadvantage. This includes the ability of food processors to import agricultural products that do not meet the same standards required of Canadian producers (House of Commons Canada 2010, 31–32).

Conclusion

This chapter has provided glimpses into the Canadian agrarian context facing young farmers, using government statistics and scholarly literature. Generally, studies on Canadian young farmers have been qualitative, with small sample sizes and restricted geographical coverage. The lack of nationally representative comprehensive data on young Canadian farmers is a major gap. As such, we are unable to generalize about “young farmers in Canada” based on results from small-scale studies. Nonetheless, as this chapter demonstrates, these studies are rich in insights that alert us to issues confronting young farmers across Canada.

At the start of the chapter, we set out that young farmers can be subdivided into returning farmers or newcomer farmers. Across the chapter, it has been demonstrated that farmers within these groups face different challenges, opportunities, and would benefit from different forms of government support. Indeed, there can be significant divergence within a group as diverse as “young Canadian farmers.” For example, some young farmers would like to expand supply management, while other young farmers would do away with supply management (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2010, 15). This reflects the fact that some young farmers seek greater intervention from the government, while others eschew government regulations and policies as a matter of principle (Laforge 2017, 220). In this chapter, the secondary literature suggests that if there is to be a generational renewal on Canada’s farms, challenges facing young farmers will have to be overcome, and that overcoming these challenges requires nuanced supports that address the different needs of newcomer and returning farmers. What is also clear, however, is that across both returning and newcomer farmers’ farming capacity to provide a viable livelihood is a specific challenge when the policy environment targets the farmers who already exist. If we are to support new farmers in entering the sector, Canada needs to rethink policy from the ground up. For years, all farmers have been bringing the same value to the market (growing a commodity). Given the lack of differentiation, they can only compete on efficiency and for decades, the result has been expansion as farmers chase economies of scale. Attracting new farmers requires a business environment where new ideas and value propositions are supported. Farmers who bring unique value to the market have more sustainable businesses and their businesses have greater potential, adequate and reliable incomes for farm families. This is necessary for sustaining and rebuilding rural communities.

The next two chapters, based on in-depth interviews with about 100 young farmers in Manitoba and Ontario, tease out many of these issues further, insights from which will be immediately relevant to research and practice.