Private-Public R&D in the Development of the Canola Industry in Canada

Chapter
Part of the Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management book series (ITKM)

Abstract

Canola has emerged as one of the world’s largest and most important edible oil crops through a mix of government action, private investment, farmer organization, and industry engagement. For the most part, the key activities have been led by or undertaken in Canada, not traditionally viewed as one of the agrifood innovation powerhouses. In many ways, this case represents the best of adoption theory in practice. Purposeful research partnerships and teams led to innovative product attributes that needed regulatory approval, then farmer acceptance, industry adaptation, and consumer demand. This has involved a nested set of investment and engagement processes that over the past 40 years have variously brought forth new varieties with improved agronomic and nutritional properties, new biotechnology traits, and a range of industrial and pharmaceutical attributes, all while maintaining both a role for producers in the research system and significant competition in the research, seed, marketing, and food processing sectors. Along the way, the industry has had to develop a range of new systems, including industry-managed identity-preserving production and marketing systems and strict segregation structures.

References

  1. Canola Council of Canada. 2011. Are you export ready? Available at: http://www.canolacouncil.org/crop-production/are-you-export-ready/. Accessed 25 Apr 2013.
  2. Dupont, J., P.J. White, K.M. Johnston, H.A. Heggtveit, B.E. McDonald, S.M. Grundy, and A. Bonanome. 1989. Food Safety and Health Effects of Canola oil. Journal of the American College of Nutrition 8(5): 360–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gray, R., and S. Malla. 1998. The evaluation of the economic and external health benefits from canola research. In Returns to Agricultural Research, ed. J. Alston and P. Pardey.Google Scholar
  4. Gusta, M., S. Smyth, K. Belcher, P. Phillips, and D. Castle. 2011. Economic Benefits of Genetically-modified Herbicide-tolerant Canola for Producers. AgBioforum 14 (1): 1–13.Google Scholar
  5. LMC International. 2016. The Economic Impact of Canola on the Canadian Economy. Oxford: LMC International. Available at: https://www.canolacouncil.org/media/584356/lmc_canola_10-year_impact_study_-_canada_final_dec_2016.pdf. Accessed 29 Oct 2017.Google Scholar
  6. McLeod, A. 1974. The story of rapeseed in Western Canada. Regina: Saskatchewan Wheat Pool.Google Scholar
  7. McVetty, P. 2009. High Erucic Acid Rapeseed (HEAR) Cultivar Development at the University of Manitoba: An Update. Presentation to the Plant Bio-Oils Workshop, Saskatoon, 25–26 Feb. Available at: http://agwest.sk.ca/events/plantbio-oils09/plant-bio-industrial-oils-09_presentations.htm. Accessed 25 Apr 2013.
  8. NRC. 1992. From Rapeseed to Canola: the Billion Dollar Success Story. Saskatoon: National Research Council.Google Scholar
  9. Phillips, P. 2003a. Affidavit of Peter WB Phillips, QB NO. 67 of 2002, Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan Between Larry Hoffman, LB Hoffman Farms Inc., and Dale Beaudoin (Plaintiffs) v. Monsanto Canada Inc. and Aventis CropScience Canada Holdings Inc. (Defendants) brought under the Class Actions Act. September.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2003b. Affidavit of Peter WB Phillips, QB NO. 67 of 2002, Court of Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan Between Larry Hoffman, LB Hoffman Farms Inc., and Dale Beaudoin (Plaintiffs) v. Monsanto Canada Inc. and Aventis CropScience Canada Holdings Inc. (Defendants) brought under the Class Actions Act. November.Google Scholar
  11. Phillips, P., and G. Khachatourians. 2001. The Biotechnology Revolution in Global Agriculture: Invention, Innovation and Investment in the Canola Sector. Wallingford: CABI.Google Scholar
  12. Phillips, P., and S. Smyth. 2004. Managing the value of new-trait varieties in the canola supply chain in Canada. Supply Chain Management 9 (4): 313–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Smyth, S., and P. Phillips. 2001. Competitors Co-operating: Establishing a Supply Chain to Manage Genetically Modified Canola. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 4: 51–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ———. 2002. Product differentiation alternatives: Identity preservation, segregation, and traceability. AgBioforum 5 (2): 30–42.Google Scholar
  15. Smyth, S., P. Phillips, W. Kerr, and G. Khachatourians. 2004. Regulating the Liabilities of Agricultural Biotechnology. Wallingford: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Smyth, S., M. Gusta, K. Belcher, P. Phillips, and D. Castle. 2011a. Environmental Impacts from Herbicide Tolerant Canola Production in Western Canada. Agricultural Systems 104: 403–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. ———. 2011b. Changes in Herbicide Use Following the Adoption of HR Canola in Western Canada. Weed Technology 25 (3): 492–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Statistics Canada. 2009. Canola: A Canadian Success Story. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/96-325-x/2007000/article/10778-eng.htm.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada

Personalised recommendations