By Tabitha Caswell
When we think of iconic technologies that have redefined modern life, we usually recognize the visionaries behind the innovation, but we often forget that many were born with significant public support.
The Internet, GPS, the very microchip powering your smartphone — dig a little, and you’ll discover a long list of cases where, time and again, government investment has taken on the highest-risk, highest-reward initiatives that private capital wouldn’t touch.
Today, as Canada’s agri-food sector faces tariff threats, supply chain fragility, and the effects of climate change, perhaps we should be asking this question:
What role can government play in driving the next wave of agricultural innovation?
The answer is not theoretical. Around the world, governments have successfully built the infrastructure, research capacity, and early-stage risk capital that fuel thriving agri-tech industries. Models in Brazil, the Netherlands, Israel, and New Zealand are all good examples. What can we learn from these examples, and do lessons align with Canada’s needs?
The Canadian challenge: innovation potential meets structural barriers
Canada’s agri-food sector is globally respected for safety, quality, and sustainability — but we underperform in turning ideas into commercial successes.
Bioenterprise Canada’s National Call to Action identifies system-level gaps, prioritizing the top four:
- Collaboration and connectivity – fragmented communication and relationship networks between farmers, innovators, researchers, and investors.
- Regulatory efficiency – complex, multi-jurisdictional approvals that delay commercialization.
- Resources and support – insufficient shared infrastructure for testing, piloting, and scaling innovation.
- Investment and funding – limited early-stage, risk-tolerant capital—especially for technologies that depend on seasonal field trials.
At the same time, Canada’s agricultural exporters face tariff headwinds and shifting trade alliances. To stay competitive, we must move from exporting raw commodities to exporting value-added, technology-enabled solutions.
The situation demands a stronger government role as catalyst, connector, and co-investor. Let’s take a look at some examples at work:
1. Brazil: EMBRAPA and the power of public research infrastructure
Few countries illustrate the value of public agricultural R&D as vividly as Brazil. In 1973, its federal government created EMBRAPA – the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation to modernize a struggling farm sector. Fifty years later, EMBRAPA’s 40-plus research centres, experimental farms, and international partnerships have transformed Brazil into one of the world’s top value-added food exporters.
How government made it happen
- Long-term funding for national research infrastructure, tied to measurable productivity outcomes.
- Integration of public scientists with private seed, fertilizer, and machinery firms to ensure commercialization pathways.
- Technology-transfer units embedded across the country to diffuse innovation to farmers.
Lessons for Canada
EMBRAPA demonstrates how public infrastructure can de-risk innovation for both startups and farmers, directly addressing Canada’s “resources & support” gap. Its regional network model parallels the Call to Action recommendation for cross-Canada testbeds and living labs. Brazil’s shift from commodity exporter to ag-tech exporter underscores how innovation supports trade resilience.
2. The Netherlands: clustering, coordination, and continuous innovation
Despite its small size, the Netherlands is a leading agricultural exporter. Its success lies in infrastructure — a dense web of public research institutes, government-funded innovation clusters, and industry-academic partnerships.
Government-built ecosystem
- Wageningen University & Research (WUR) anchors a national agricultural knowledge system co-funded by the Dutch government.
- Publicly-backed field labs like Tomatoworld, The Green Village, Greenhouse for the Future, and Brainport Industries Campuslet companies trial robots, sensors, and data-driven growing systems side-by-side with researchers.
- Public incentives and targeted programs like NXTGEN Hightech direct over €1 billion by 2030 into high-tech agrifood sectors.
Rapid commercialization of climate-controlled horticulture, vertical farming, and precision livestock systems translate into continuous export growth of both food and ag-technology.
Lessons for Canada
The Dutch “cluster” model addresses Canada’s collaboration and connectivity challenge: research, private sector, and policy are tightly aligned. Its stable, innovation-friendly regulatory environment accelerates adoption, mirroring recommendations for regulatory reform in the Call to Action. As tariffs reshape global trade, Canada could emulate the Netherlands by exporting technology and know-how, not just commodities.
3. Israel: government as risk-sharing venture capitalist
Where Brazil and the Netherlands emphasize infrastructure, Israel excels at risk capital. Since the 1960s, the government’s Office of the Chief Scientist, now known as the Israel Innovation Authority (IIA), has invested directly in R&D, offering conditional loans and matching grants to de-risk innovation, repaid only if a technology succeeds commercially (in the form of royalties).
Government-led mechanisms
- Sector-specific incubators, including dedicated agri-tech programs for irrigation, sensors, and desert agriculture.
- The BIRD Foundation, a binational U.S.–Israel R&D partnership, co-funds export-oriented technologies — many in precision agriculture.
- Public funding designed explicitly to crowd in private venture capital (VC) rather than crowd it out.
Lessons for Canada
Israel addresses the investment and funding gap identified in the Call to Action: it treats early-stage innovation as a public good requiring government risk-sharing. Canada’s agri-tech innovators could benefit from similar conditional-repayment or co-investment models, particularly for field-testing technologies constrained by seasonality. By funding export-ready innovation, Canada could mitigate tariff risk through diversification of markets.
4. New Zealand: transforming a sector through a national plan
New Zealand’s Agritech Industry Transformation Plan (ITP), launched in 2020, shows what happens when a government declares agri-tech a national priority.
Key components
- Government invested an initial $11.4 million to implement a $40 million Agri-tech Venture Capital Fund to fill early-stage financing gaps.
- Creation of shared R&D infrastructure such as the Ag Emissions Centre (formerly the New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre) and AgriZero NZ, both public-private initiatives focused on climate-smart technologies.
- Coordinated export strategy and international partnerships with the U.K. Agri-Tech Centre and others.
These initiatives created a surge in agri-tech startups and inward investment, focusing innovation on methane-reduction tools, robotic milking, and sustainable nutrient management.
Lessons for Canada
The New Zealand public-private partnerships embody the collaboration and connectivity goal of the Call to Action — government, industry, and research institutions co-creating a unified roadmap. It also exemplifies “policy pull”: government procurement and regulation stimulate demand for innovation. For Canada, a similar transformation plan could align climate goals, trade diversification, and agri-innovation under one coordinated strategy.
Cross-country insights: what the leaders have in common
What unites Brazil, the Netherlands, Israel, and New Zealand is simple: each government made a deliberate, long-term planning decision to treat agricultural innovation as a strategic national priority worthy of sustained, predictable public investment.
Canada has not yet made that choice. Despite boasting world-class research and talented entrepreneurs, no federal government has committed to the long-term, cross-mandate support that translates potential into global leadership.
Across these four nations, patterns emerge:
Recurring patterns include long-term public R&D infrastructure, government risk-sharing investment, integrated ecosystems, stable regulatory frameworks, and export-oriented strategies — all mapping neatly to the top four gaps identified in Canada’s National Call to Action.
What this means for Canada: a practical agenda
Becoming an agri-food innovation superpower will require more than incremental tweaks. It demands what Brazil, the Netherlands, Israel, and New Zealand all delivered: a clear, long-term federal commitment that makes innovation a core priority across budgets, departments, and election cycles. Until Canada’s government accepts that sustained public investment is indispensable — not optional — we will remain stuck in catch-up mode. Once that strategic decision is made, we’ll be better positioned to:
- Invest in shared infrastructure
Fund regional testbeds, digital-ag platforms, and climate-smart demo farms open to startups, researchers, and producers; and encourage cross-province collaboration and data sharing. - Launch a federal agri-innovation investment fund
Modeled after Israel’s IIA and NZ’s VC fund, co-invest with private partners in early-stage agri-tech ventures; and use tools like conditional-repayment structures to recycle capital. - Simplify regulation and incentivize adoption
Harmonize regulatory frameworks for on-farm trials and agri-biotech approvals; and provide accelerated pathways for low-risk innovations tied to sustainability goals. - Strengthen farmer–innovator connectivity
Support matchmaking programs, demonstration events, and extension services that link technology developers directly with producers. - Integrate innovation with trade strategy
Embed agri-tech within Canada’s trade missions and export-promotion efforts; and use innovation to offset tariff risk by expanding into markets demanding sustainable, high-tech food solutions.
Together, these steps would align domestic innovation policy with global competitiveness and ensure that public investment delivers both economic and food-security dividends.
Building Canada’s next great leap
History shows that when government steps forward to build the scaffolding of innovation — labs, funds, partnerships, and policy certainty — private enterprise climbs higher and faster. Brazil, the Netherlands, Israel, and New Zealand prove that government’s role is not to control innovation but to enable it.
For Canada, the path forward is clear, but it begins with a choice no previous federal government has fully made: to treat agri-food innovation as a long-term strategic action plan that deserves patient, predictable, cross-government investment, just as our peers have done. This will allow us to:
- Invest strategically.
- Coordinate nationally.
- Export intelligently.
If we build the right infrastructure now, Canada can lead the world — delivering the technologies, practices, and sustainable solutions that will feed the planet and secure our agri-trade future.