THE STATE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE 2024FAOVALUE-DRIVEN TRANSFORMATIONOF AGRIFOOD SYSTEMSFOOD AND AGRI.
2024-12-05
171页
5星级
AGRIFOOD SOLUTIONS TO CLIMATE CHANGEFAOs work to tackle the climate crisisRequired citation:FAO.2023.
2024-12-05
64页
5星级
Agrivoltaics in IndiaJanuary 2024Building a betterworking worldAGRIVOLTAICS IN INDIAJanuary 2024As a.
2024-12-02
108页
5星级
Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainersiFood and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsRome,2024Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainersThe designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO)concerning the legal or development status of any country,territory,city or area or of its authorities,or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers,whether or not these have been patented,does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.ISBN 978-92-5-139383-3 FAO,2024 Some rights reserved.This work is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence(CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO;https:/creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo/legalcode).Under the terms of this licence,this work may be copied,redistributed and adapted for non-commercial purposes,provided that the work is appropriately cited.In any use of this work,there should be no suggestion that FAO endorses any specific organization,products or services.The use of the FAO logo is not permitted.If the work is adapted,then it must be licensed under the same or equivalent Creative Commons licence.If a translation of this work is created,it must include the following disclaimer along with the required citation:“This translation was not created by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO).FAO is not responsible for the content or accuracy of this translation.The original English edition shall be the authoritative edition.”Disputes arising under the licence that cannot be settled amicably will be resolved by mediation and arbitration as described in Article 8 of the licence except as otherwise provided herein.The applicable mediation rules will be the mediation rules of the World Intellectual Property Organization http:/www.wipo.int/amc/en/mediation/rules and any arbitration will be conducted in accordance with the Arbitration Rules of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law(UNCITRAL).Third-party materials.Users wishing to reuse material from this work that is attributed to a third party,such as tables,figures or images,are responsible for determining whether permission is needed for that reuse and for obtaining permission from the copyright holder.The risk of claims resulting from infringement of any third-party-owned component in the work rests solely with the user.Sales,rights and licensing.FAO information products are available on the FAO website(www.fao.org/publications)and can be purchased through publications-salesfao.org.Requests for commercial use should be submitted via:www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request.Queries regarding rights and licensing should be submitted to:copyrightfao.org.Cover photo:iStockRequired citation:FAO.2024.Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers.Rome.https:/doi.org/10.4060/cd3325eniiiContentsAcknowledgements iv1.Introduction 12.Target users 23.Documentation and tools 3Training guide 3Technical guide 3Slide deck 4Trainers workplan 44.Organizing a training session 5Annex 1.Slide deck for training on monitoring,evaluation and learning(MEL)in tropical fruit value chains 8Annex 2.Draft trainers workplan for a training session 25ivAcknowledgementsThis guide was produced by the Markets and Trade Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO)and is a product of the project“Building responsible global value chains for the sustainable production and trade of tropical fruits”(the Responsible Fruits Project).The project helps companies,producer and farmer organizations,trade associations,processors,packers,exporters and importers in the avocado and pineapple sectors to become more sustainable and resilient to shocks.This training guide was prepared by Mara Hernndez Lagana and Michael Riggs,both from the Responsible Fruits Project team.The document benefited from the overall guidance and support of Pascal Liu,Senior Economist and Team Leader,Responsible Global Value Chains team,Markets and Trade Division.Thanks to Laura del Castillo Buelga for her overall support in publishing this guide.Thanks to Jonathan Hallo who created the graphic design of the document.The elaboration of this guide was possible thanks to support from the Government of Germany.11.IntroductionThe FAO technical guide,“Monitoring,evaluation and learning(MEL):generating evidence on resilience and sustainability in the tropical fruit sector”,was developed to support export-oriented producers and businesses to generate information needed to measure and track progress towards the resilience and sustainability ambitions.Evidence generation is a key component of responsible business conduct and due diligence,requiring businesses to track and report on progress made towards achieving their sustainability goals and to provide evidence to customers and consumers about how businesses are committing to sustainability.The technical guide aims to equip users with the knowledge on how to set up a MEL system,from the development of a resilience and sustainability strategy for their operations to the selection of indicators,data collection tools and data analysis to support decision-making.Recognizing the need for capacity development and to make the content of the technical guide accessible to different audiences,including producers,associations working with small growers and other businesses,the Responsible Fruits Project has developed a learning module.The learning module is composed of two items:this training guide and a slide deck for trainers.TIt provides the basic content for trainers and others to design and deliver an introductory session to support the application of MEL in tropical fruit value chains.FAO may update this training guide from time to time based on experience,or as technology or knowledge evolves.Feedback and suggestions to improve these learning materials are welcome from any user at any time by writing to responsible-fruitsfao.org.2Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers2.Target usersThis guide is a resource to help trainers and others involved in capacity development to get a better understanding of what MEL is,why it is important to the resilience and sustainability of tropical fruit value chains and how to start developing a MEL plan for tropical fruit businesses.Given the detail required to set up a MEL system,this training guide is intended for different users:a.Trainers:This learning module provides trainers with practical resources to organize and deliver training either to a set of producers or businesses,for instance,as part of a session organized by a producer association to train business staff who will be involved in MEL activities(e.g.sustainability teams,human resources,field operations officers,etc.).The trainer will be in charge of supporting tropical fruit businesses to either become familiar with MEL and its related practices or,for more advanced users,begin implementing MEL practices effectively.Trainers may refer to the MEL technical guide prepared by the Responsible Fruits Project(more details in the subsequent section)for a better understanding of the topic and the content in the capacity development material.b.Learners beginners:they include users who require a basic understanding of what MEL is and how to conduct it,such as those who may become responsible for or are supporting the implementation of MEL in their tropical fruit business.This learning module will serve as a starting point for understanding key concepts,learn how they can support their business to start developing a resilience and sustainability strategy and how to measure progress towards their success.c.Learners advanced:they include experienced personnel who are responsible for implementing MEL in their businesses or associations such as monitoring and evaluation officers,sustainability officers,sustainability teams and other professionals responsible for conducting the MEL practices in tropical fruit businesses.This learning module will give them resources to refine their existing MEL exercises and align them with good practices on MEL where applicable.The module also provides guidance on how MEL relates to responsible business conduct and due diligence,which might be required for market compliance.33.Documentation and toolsThe Responsible Fruits Project developed resources to support understanding and operationalizing MEL in tropical fruit value chains.All these materials are available in English and Spanish.Training guideThis training guide is a companion to the technical guide and provides a starter kit for trainers,learners and others who are developing capacities to implement a MEL system to generate evidence on resilience and sustainability goals of tropical fruit businesses.Technical guideThe technical guide,“Monitoring,evaluation and learning(MEL):generating evidence on resilience and sustainability in the tropical fruit sector”,provides a step-by-step guidance on how to implement a MEL system.The guide introduces readers to the topic of MEL,its importance to make business operations more resilient and sustainable and its alignment with responsible business conduct and due diligence practices.The technical guide provides in-depth guidance to set up a MEL system.It first guides users on how to develop a resilience and sustainability strategy using Theories of Change,then supports users on how to define outcomes,outputs and activities needed to achieve the resilience and sustainability goals.Then,it provides guidance on how to define the indicators needed to generate evidence,select the data collection tools,carry out data analysis and use the information generated for decision making.This document also offers links to several resources and recommendations that can support businesses to report on progress.The technical guide is available in English and Spanish.4Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainersSlide deckOne slide deck is available for use in a learning context.The deck provides an overview of the relevant content in the technical guide.This content is suitable for use in an introductory capacity development event organized by a tropical fruit company or an association representing producers,packers and export-oriented businesses overall.The content in the slides has been developed by FAO and was tested during the validation workshop of the technical guide.You will find the slides in Annex 1 of this training guide.To download an editable version of the slide deck,go to the projects webpage on resilience,or write to responsible-fruitsfao.org.The slide deck is available in English and Spanish.Trainers workplanA guiding workplan and a script to accompany the slide deck are available to support the trainer to organize and facilitate capacity development sessions.It also provides suggestions for preparatory work to ensure that the information provided is well contextualized for the learners.You will find the workplan in Annex 2 of this training guide.54.Organizing a training sessionThe slide deck on MEL in tropical fruit value chains(see Annex 1)is a structured document that supports trainers to guide participants to:understand the concepts of MEL and why these are relevant to the resilience and sustainability of their operations;and get an overview and practical guidance of the key steps to follow to set up a MEL system in their operations.The slide deck can and should be adapted to fit the context in which the capacity development exercise is carried out.Learning outcomes are more impactful if the slides and content are contextualized to the local risks and targeted audience.Tailoring of the slide content can be done by pre-identifying and selecting the environmental and social risks relevant to the country or region of production,or by fine-tuning the content relative to the scale of the businesses operations(e.g.small,medium or large;single company or producer association).A suggestion on where changes can be made is provided in the work plan(Annex 2).A summary of a capacity development session is provided under Session preview.When organizing a capacity development session,the trainer should consider the following:Engage with relevant colleagues from the association or company to get a good understanding of the objective of the training,context of the operations,and learners profile.This will also ensure that appropriate company or association members are attending.For instance,the sustainability officer in charge of conducting risk assessment processes,certification compliance officer,phytosanitary officer,etc.Familiarize yourself with the slide deck and script and adjust them as required to meet the participants needs.If required,ask relevant company/association colleagues(point above)for any key information you may need to customize the content of the slides to make it suitable to the context of the business operations(e.g.environmental challenges,ongoing social-related issues,compliance with voluntary sustainability standards/certifications,etc.).Decide whether any other materials or tools(e.g.flip chart,Menti poll)will be needed to make the session more interactive and guide discussions(e.g.Slide 18).Based on this decision,prepare the relevant tools and materials.6Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainersSession previewSectionDescriptionSession purposeTo provide an overview of monitoring,evaluation and learning(MEL)and its important role in supporting tropical fruit value chains to become more resilient and sustainable.The session also introduces the key steps to follow to put MEL in practice.Session contentsBuilding on the MEL technical guide for tropical fruit value chains,this session introduces participants to key concepts and steps for implementing a MEL system as part of business operations.To help tropical fruit businesses apply this process in practice,the session covers the following topics:The purpose and importance of MEL in tropical fruit value chains,and how it is aligned with responsible business conduct and due diligence practices.Key steps for implementing MEL and important considerations.Introductory guidance on designing a resilience and sustainability strategy,which forms the foundation of a MEL system.Intended audienceProducers,packers,exporters,business associations,researchers,MEL practitioners and any others who are interested in better measuring,tracking and reporting on their sustainability and resilience goals and progress.Businesses that aim to comply with due diligence requirements of importing markets can also benefit from this learning module.Human resources suggested1 facilitator,1 co-facilitator/notetaker(if available)for capturing key discussion points and brainstorming,for reporting,for handling printouts(if needed),etc.Session duration1.5 hours.The duration will vary depending on the number,type and length of exercises and discussions organized,as well as on the breaks taken during the session.If required,the trainer could split the session into two sections to avoid participants fatigue.Pre-readingTechnical guide:“Monitoring,evaluation and learning(MEL):generating evidence on resilience and sustainability in the tropical fruit sector.”MethodsThe session can be delivered in person and/or online.It is advisable that the learning session be as interactive as possible to facilitate the understanding of key concepts and processes.For example,this can be done by prompting questions throughout the presentations,using external tools(e.g.Mentimeter,Whiteboard,etc.)to facilitate brainstorming and discussion,or organizing paired or small-group work for understanding the context of the operations,the definition of indicators,the resilience and sustainability goal of the business,etc.Session outputs An awareness of MEL,and its relevance for enhanced resilience,sustainability and global trade.An understanding of what key steps are needed to develop a MEL system aiming to measure and track progress towards resilience and sustainability goals and objective.An awareness of FAOs technical guide on MEL for tropical fruit value chains.Note:This is only an introductory session.Neither the development of a resilience and sustainability strategy,nor the elaboration of each MEL step are intended to be completed in this session.7 If the business or association intends to conduct a follow-up exercise for the design of a resilience and sustainability strategy or a MEL system,having a note-taker in the session would be important.The person will support capturing key ideas and information that might come out as part of the discussions and will inform the follow-up exercise.Share with participants the session overview prior to the training session with participants.If you are training several members of a single company or association,ask the focal points to share these tools with their colleagues.8Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainersAnnex 1.Slide deck for training on monitoring,evaluation and learning(MEL)in tropical fruit value chainsPlease contact the Responsible Fruits Project team at responsible-fruitsfao.org to access an editable version of the slide deck.9Annex 1.10Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers11Annex 1.12Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers13Annex 1.14Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers15Annex 1.16Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers17Annex 1.18Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers19Annex 1.20Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers21Annex 1.22Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers23Annex 1.24Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainers25Annex 2.Draft trainers workplan for a training sessionThe following provides a workplan that trainers and facilitators can use to plan and guide a capacity development session.The guidance is for reference only it can and should be adapted to fit the local context of the training and participants.It suggests actions and activities that the facilitator needs to think through and prepare prior to the training session.This section also highlights exercises that need advance planning,ideally in consultation with company staff to ensure their relevance.These refer to specific slides as highlighted in the plan.SlideSuggested actions for the preparatory work8Purpose:Discuss why MEL is important to the resilience and sustainability of business.To make the session more interactive,the trainer can start with a brainstorming session.The trainer can ask participants how they think MEL can support building the resilience of their operations and make their operations more sustainable in the long term.Suggested question:How do you think MEL can make your business more resilient and/or sustainable?14Purpose:contextualize and discuss the operations.The slide discusses how understanding the context of the operations is essential to start designing a resilience and sustainability strategy,including defining its goal.The trainer can look in advance and present real-world examples during the session.If possible,the trainer should prepare some actual examples of some or all the aspects highlighted in the slide(main risks,timing of the risks,operations and populations exposed to the risks and existing capacities of the business to address such risks)with the aim of presenting real-world examples during the session.The examples will be based on knowledge of the industry or company involved in the training.This can be derived from discussions with relevant officers and/or through secondary research and information(e.g.news articles,market reports,national climate forecasts,etc.).Otherwise,the trainer can open this up for discussion and seek live input from participant during the session.If the trainer uses examples prepared in advanced,the discussion should include getting participants validation of such examples,and input on other relevant examples based on their own experiences.If a note-taker is in the session,this can be an opportunity to gather feedback on the aspects under discussion.26Monitoring,evaluation and learning in the tropical fruit sector to generate evidence for sustainability and resilience An introductory guide for trainersSlideSuggested actions for the preparatory work16Purpose:provide an overview of how a resilience and sustainability strategy is developed.The slide has animation.It is important the trainer familiarizes themselves with the content.Note that the strategy is developed backwards,i.e.the goal is set first,and then,outcome,outputs and activities are defined.Shocks,stresses and risks,as well as populations and/or landscapes benefited by the strategy(identified in Step 1,slide 14)should be considered throughout the development of the strategy to ensure that risks and specific needs are effectively addressed.17,18 and 19Purpose:to brainstorm so that participants can start thinking about the activities,outputs and outcomes needed to reach a resilience and sustainability goal.A concrete example is useful for learning.Thus,a goal statement has been developed for a fictitious company,“Company A”.The facilitator should familiarize themselves with the statement and some suggested actions(slide 18)and ask participants the actions they think Company A needs to take to achieve the goal.Slide 18 has a full example focusing on the activities,outputs and outcomes related to the section on“sustainably produced”fruits.You can take this for discussion and open the floor for participants to provide more ideas on what could be done.Slide 19 summarizes other generic actions contributing to the rest of the components of the goal.23 and 24Purpose:provide an example of how indicators can be developed.Slide 23 presents the output for Company A and relates to the“sustainability”aspect of the goal outlined in Slide 17.It is important for the trainer to explain that the indicator must measure whether both company farmers and external growers have improved water use efficiency for irrigation.External growers supplying fruit to the company must also be considered,as this is required for Company A to meet due diligence obligations in its primary export market.Additionally,the indicator must serve as a tool to report on certification requirements,which include tracking the amount of water extracted to assess water use efficiency and sustainability.Slide 24 identifies all the different components of the indicator presented in Slide 22 and suggests two different and complementary indicators to measure it.27Purpose:present an overview of the types of data analysis available.The trainer is not expected to present each type of data analysis in detail.The idea is to give an overview of what companies can do with the data collected,what type of information can be gathered and how it can be presented in their reports.It is important that participants understand that someone with at least basic data analysis skills and software use(e.g.Excel)is required to take care of this task.27BUILDING RESPONSIBLE GLOBAL VALUE CHAINSFOR SUSTAINABLE TROPICAL FRUITSGET IN TOUCHResponsible Fruits ProjectResponsible-Fruitsfao.orghttps:/bit.ly/responsible-fruitsMarkets and Trade Division Economic and Social Development Streamwww.fao.org/markets-and-trade Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsRome,ItalySupported by:
2024-11-29
34页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-29
23页
5星级
Australias National ScienceAgencyAg2050 ScenariosReport 2024AuthorshipThis report was lead authored(in alphabetical order)by Philippa Clegg,James Deverell,MichealaKuen,Kate McMahon,Yasmin Morgan,Rohini Poonyth and Katherine Wynn with input from over 100participants across different organisations fromgovernment,industry and research leaders.CSIRO FuturesAt CSIRO Futures,we bring together science,technology and economics to help you develop transformative strategies that tackle your biggest challenges.As the strategic and economic advisory arm of Australias national science agency,we are uniquely positioned to transform complexity into clarity,uncertainty into opportunity and insights into action.CSIRO Agriculture and Food CSIROs work in agriculture and food is solving the greatest challenges through innovative science and technology to build a profitable,productive,trusted and sustainable agrifood and fibre sector for the future.Working with CSIRO provides access to world-class multidisciplinary science,technology and facilities,relevant intellectual property and global networks across the value chain(from gene to the plate).Our people and partnerships span Australia and 25 countries,fostering a shared vision to create measurable economic,environmental and social impact,and delivering new pathways and new technologies for the future.AccessibilityCSIRO is committed to providing web-accessible content wherever possible.If you are having difficulties with accessing this document,please contact csiro.au/contactAcknowledgementCSIRO acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the land,sea and waters,of the areas that we live and work on across Australia.We acknowledge their continuing connection to culture and we pay our respects to their Elders,past and present.The project team is grateful to the many stakeholders who generously gave their time to provide input to this project through consultations,workshops,reviews and feedback.We thank the members of the projects Steering Committee,including representatives from the Department of Agriculture,Fisheries and Forestry,the Australian Farming Institute and CSIRO.Project partnershipThe Ag2050 Scenarios Report project was led by CSIRO with financial and in-kind support from the Australian Government Department of Agriculture,Fisheries and Forestry.CSIRO would like to acknowledge the contributions of DAFF as advocates of co-design and connecting with industry to ensure their involvement and for bringing policy insights to the co-design process.Copyright Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation 2024.To the extent permitted by law,all rights are reserved,and no part of this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of CSIRO.Foreword Agriculture is a key industry for Australia,shaping our society,and providing thefoodwe eat.Whilemany Australians may never step foot on a farm,our farmingsystems touch every family and individual.This report,spanning land-based farming,forestry,aquaculture and fisheries explores the complexity andinterconnection ofthese systems.Despite Australias significant role in agriculture and innovation,the sector faces threats to productivity,resilience and sustainability.Cross-sectoral,evidence-based exploration is essential to build our understanding and shape a shared vision for what farming systems should,could and need to look like by 2050.This report seeks to motivate discussions among industry,researchers and government entities regarding the plausible futures for Australian farming systems.Theprimary aim is to expand the scope and urgency of collaborative and strategic planning,ultimately shaping a comprehensive plan for effective transformative change across the entire agricultural system.This report marks the first phase in a four-year CSIRO program,Ag2050,to identify the necessary interventions,innovations and support crucial for a productive,resilient and sustainable future for Australian agriculture.CSIRO,asAustralias national science agency,draws on deep expertise across farming systems,integrating insights from a range of stakeholders including government,industry and research groups.Together with our project partner,the Department of Agriculture,Fisheries and Forestry,we thank all the stakeholders who contributed to this critical report.Australias response to emerging trends and challenges will determine the future of its farming systems.The increasing risk posed by climate change,increasing geopolitical uncertainty,labour constraints,changing consumer demands and the rapid pace of innovation underscores the complexities faced by Australian farms.However,within these challenges lie opportunities that Australia is well-positioned to leverage with its natural assets and global position.The core message conveyed in this report is that attaining a productive,resilient and sustainable future for Australian agriculture is within reach.However,it will require significant expertise,experience,energy and a collaborative commitment across both public and private sector organisations.This report presents a suite of plausible,contrasting future scenarios,some more desirable than others,but each scenario presents trade-offs and implications.These are intended to stimulate discussion and raise questions for further research that will contribute to the transformation and adaptation of our farming systems,ensuring they are fit for the future.We would like to acknowledge the absence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices in the future scenarios in this report.This gap reflects the significant current underrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge in agriculture systems.We want to do our part in influencing the national agriculture systems to be more inclusive.This report will be followed by the Indigenous Futures Caring for Country and Agriculture 2050 initiative,a collaboration with CSIRO and the Department of Agriculture,Fisheries and Forestry.Taking a relationship-first approach,this 2-year initiative aims to increase R&D partnerships with Indigenous organisations and communities,increase Indigenous-led science and engagement,and increase diversity,inclusion and belonging in the agriculture system.I am motivated by the collaborative,evidence-based and long-term possibilities presented in this report,and I hope you will be too.Michael Robertson Director Agriculture and Food,CSIROiParticipating organisationsCSIRO would like to thank all consulted organisations and individuals for contributing to this project through consultations,workshops and reviews.Listed below are those organisations that consented to be named.Agricultural Innovation Australia Agriculture VictoriaAgriFutures AustraliaAGZero 2030Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and SciencesAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchAustralian EggsAustralian Farm Institute Australian Food and Grocery CouncilAustralian Forest Productions AssociationAustralian National University(ANU)Australian Wool InnovationBayer Crop Science AustraliaBiosecurity Advisory ServiceBureau of MeteorologyCaneGrowersCarbon Farmers of AustraliaColesCosta GroupCotton Seed DistributorsCropLifeDairy AustraliaDepartment of Agriculture,Fisheries and ForestryDepartment of Climate Change,Energy,the Environment and WaterDepartment of Industry,Science and ResourcesDepartment of Primary Industries and Regions Department of Prime Minister and CabinetDepartment of Regional NSWFisheries Research and Development Corporation(FRDC)Fonterra AustraliaForest and Wood Products AustraliaFuture Farmers NetworkGrainCorpGrains Research and Development Corporation(GRDC)InterGrainLiveCorpLoam BioMain Sequence VenturesMeat and Livestock AustraliaNational Farmers FederationNestle AustraliaNous GroupNRM Regions AustraliaNSW Department of Primary IndustriesProtected Cropping AustraliaRabo BankSA Department of Primary Industries and Regions(PIRSA)Simplot AustraliaSyngentaTAS Department of Natural Resources and EnvironmentThe Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food InnovationUniversity of AdelaideWildlife Health Australiaii Ag2050 ScenariosReport ContentsForeword .iParticipating organisations.iiExecutive summary.ivGlossary.xii1 Introduction.1The imperative for Australian agriculture .1Report methodology .2How to read this report.5Three points to consider throughout this report .62 Priorities for Australian agriculture.7Global context.8Environment and climate.11Land and water.14Productivity and innovation.18Trade and market access.233 Future scenarios .31How to read this chapter.31Scenario 1:Regional Ag capitals.36Scenario 2:Landscape stewardship .40Scenario 3:Climate survival.44Scenario 4:System decline.484 Considerations .51Appendix Driver and driver outcome definitions .59iiiExecutive summaryThe Ag2050 Scenarios Report explores a range of significant trends,risks and opportunities to identify key shifts and actions needed to support Australian farming systems into the future.This report aims to motivate discussions and actions around plausible futures and seeks to answer the question:what does a productive,resilient and sustainable future look like for Australian farming systems by 2050?Why agriculture?As of early 2024,agriculture in Australia has seen several years of high yield and profitability through continuous adaptation and leading innovation.However,there are several key threats to farm productivity,resilience,and sustainability that are already impacting farming systems,fisheries and forestry.These growing threats include climate change,emissions reduction targets,supply chain disruptions,workforce access,changing consumer preferences,market access,and innovation timelines.Why now?The last two decades have shown long-term reductions in farm profit,with projections estimating that these growing threats could cause profitability decline in some areas by up to 50%by 2050.1 Australian agriculture has an active innovation system focussed mainly on short to medium-term deliverables(510 years)and commodity groups within existing farming systems.Australia will need to accelerate the transformation of its current farming systems to respond to these complex and whole-of-sector challenges and deliver against the sustainability,productivity and profitability needs of 2050.As such,there is a need for whole-of-system planning that provides the agricultural innovation system with achievable stepping stones towards long-term transformative system change.Why future scenarios?The goal of this report is to motivate discussions between industry,researchers and policy makers on the strategy and coordination needed for the Australian agriculture innovation system to productively address cross-sectoral challenges and opportunities.By exploring four plausible,alternative futures for Australian farming,this report aims to expand the scope and urgency of collaborative and whole-of-sector strategic thinking for decision makers at all levels across the agriculture sector.This work combines research by CSIRO and input from leaders and organisations across the Australian agriculture industry,research and government sectors to develop a set of four plausible and evidence-based scenarios for 2050.It was developed through a highly collaborative approach over 6 months that combined input from over 100participants across 54 organisations in a co-design workshop series.1 Hughes N,Gooday P(2021)Climate change impacts and adaptation on Australian farms.ABARES,DAFF.(accessed 31 January 2024).iv Ag2050 ScenariosReport How to read this summary Immerse yourself in the four contrasting future scenarios below.These scenarios are evidence-based and plausible explorations of what Australian farming systems could look like by 2050.While some may have more desirable elements than others,it is important to note that there is no one preferred future scenario and every scenario presents trade-offs.What is possible for Australian farming ifthe agriculture innovation system achieves its full potential?Scenario 1 Regional Ag capitalsScenario 2 Landscape stewardship What can be achieved with incrementalinnovation and proactiveclimate adaptation?Scenario 3 Climate survivalWhat if agriculture fails to effectively respond to the challenges and needs of2050?Scenario 4 System declineEach scenario contains a set of key signposts.Signpostsare the unique trends,events or signals that could indicate the sector is on a pathway to the future described in the scenarios.Next,explore the five fundamental shifts Australia needs to make to identify and pursue the future it wants for its farming systems.Five shifts:climate adaptation,land and water,industry,regions and whole-of-system change were developed drawing on insights from the co-design workshops and CSIROs research.A set of action areas were defined for each fundamental shift.These action areas are not exhaustive,but help to articulate the initial changes,assumptions testing,and initiatives required.Ultimately,achieving the most optimistic future is plausible for Australian agriculture.However,it will require significant effort,collaboration and action across the public and private sectors.MethodologyThrough a rigorous literature review and extensive consultation with stakeholders,14drivers of change were identified.Thesedrivers will shape the direction and speed of change across Australian farming systems to 2050.Foreach driver,two contrasting and alternative outcomes were developed.In a series of co-design workshops,these driver outcomes were logically grouped to form the foundation of the four future scenarios in this report.Over the next few years,the CSIRO Ag2050 program will continue to iterate these initial future scenarios through modelling and consultation to inform the policy and R&D actions required by industry and government to facilitate a preferable future.It is important to note that the four future scenarios included in this report cover a wide range of plausible outcomes,however they are not mutually exclusive,nor exhaustive of the future possibilities.Additionally,while these scenarios will have implications across broader agrifood value chains,the scope of this report is pre-farm gate.vRegional Ag capitalsLarge multinational corporations have consolidated and seamlessly integrated muchof Australias agriculture valuechains.By leveraging transformative technologies,increased levels of productivity have been unlocked.New workforce opportunities have emerged,concentrated in a select few regional cities where multiple sectors areexperiencing growth.How do we know we are heading here?industry investment in novel climate adaptation strategies industry-led collaboration and R&D investments rates of industry and supply chain consolidation investment in novel food andfibre production concentration of investment in select regional centres.What does the agriculture sector look like in 2050?Increasing yields and productivity gainsFood and fibre focus through new and intensified production systems Decreasing emission intensity and plateaued absolute emissionsImprovements to the health of ecosystemservices Skilled and diverse workforce in select growing regional citiesStep-change investment and uptake of disruptive agritechEvidence-based and Australian-led trade frameworksvi Ag2050 ScenariosReport Landscape stewardshipUsing the land to support the energy transition through carbon capture and the restoration of the environment is a national priority.Farming systems are resilient andproductive because producers have taken advantage of a range of diverse income streams,blurring the lines between farming,biodiversity,carbon sequestration,andenergy andfuel production.How do we know we are heading here?investment in novel climate adaptation strategies R&D investments across industries and sectors strength of governance and guidance across land uses application of novel cross-sector and diversified business models growth in food and fibreproduction.What does the agriculture sector look like in 2050?Strong Australian brand for high-value goodsIncreasing productivity gains and resilienceDiversified into innovative new market opportunitiesDecreasing absolute emissions and increasing carbon sequestrationActive improvement to biodiversity and ecosystem servicesSkilled and diverse workforce attracted to the sectorStep-change investment and uptake of disruptive agritechviiClimate survivalWithout transformative change,the agriculture sector is forced to focus on surviving rather than thriving.Producersrelocate and incrementally adapt and diversify their farming systems to offset the impacts of climate change.However,they remain uncertain about the long-term viability of theirbusinesses.How do we know we are heading here?adoption of compounding of incremental climate change adaptation strategiesagriculture R&D investmentsapplication of diverse land management practicescollaboration between industryand governmenttrust in Australian agriculturebrand.What does the agriculture sector look like in 2050?Plateauing productivity and efficiency gainsDiversified land management practices and productsSome reduction in emissions intensities while lagging national net zero targetsSlow deterioration of biological biodiversity and ecosystem servicesSome talent attraction and retentionIncremental investment and uptake of low-risk technologiesDiverse relationships to maintain an export marketviii Ag2050 ScenariosReport System declineThe Australian agriculture sector has reached a tipping point.Delayedand fragmented decision-making has left producers facing the economic and environmental consequences of extreme weather events and biosecurity outbreaks.With only incremental advances inagritech,many farm businesses are struggling to maintain profit.How do we know we are heading here?collaboration on climate change adaptation strategies short-term and reactionary focus of R&D system on-farm production intensity rates of biodiversity loss regional marginalisation.What does the agriculture sector look like in 2050?Declining yields and productivity gainsFood and fibre focus with traditional intensified production systemsLagging reduction in emission intensities and failing emissions reduction targetsDeclining biodiversity and ecosystem serviceshealthShrinking workforce and increasing number of farmers exiting the sectorIncremental investment and uptake of low-risk technologiesExport focus to low price marketsixConsiderations for policy and R&D actionsHow Australia responds to trends and challenges will determine,in large part,its future outcomes.Thefourfuture scenarios describe plausible alternative futures for Australian agriculture each with benefits and challenges.Thissection outlines five initial shifts that Australian agriculture will need to make to identify the future it wants for its farming systems.Climate adaptationA climate adaptation shift will support Australian food and fibre production to pursue growth in profitability and productivity within the context of a changing climate.Increase research into climate change impacts understand and forecast the impacts of climate change and offset strategies on ecosystem services and agriculture production at a regional level.Increase research on adaptation approaches identify adaptation approaches through continued research and strengthening international cross-collaboration.Test for likely success of adaptation activities test and demonstrate that adaptation strategies are adequate measures under a variety of global conditions,what social and policy measures are needed in regions,and how to monitor adaption action in the sector.Land and seasA land and sea shift will create a profitable and sustainable mix of food,fibre,and energy production and provide opportunities in carbon markets.Improve understanding of on-farm emissions reduction including technology adoption challenges and incentives model trade-offs between emission reduction and productivity under different global settings,incentivise the adoption of emission reduction through solving for process and technology challenges.Model further land and sea use options and impacts models to optimise alternative land and sea uses in regions,maps and tracking of land and sea use changes,monitoring impact on nearby ecosystems,and identifying repurposing of non-arable land.Deepen understanding of carbon sequestration and ecosystem services opportunities identity incentives for long-term sustainable practises,carbon sequestration opportunities,and in new technologies such as biotech and synthetic ecosystem services.Foster sustainable agricultural practices through Indigenous-led research and Indigenous-led co-design use co-design and two-way learning approaches to respectfully develop new knowledge bases for agricultural R&D that integrate Indigenous and scientific knowledge systems.IndustryAn industry shift will enable a productive and resilient agricultural sector and economy and provide new opportunities for exports and income streams.Build support for skills and human capital identify and communicate the skills and jobs required in the future,barriers and incentives to education and career pathways in regions,potential trade-offs and co-benefits of automation,and establish strategic partnerships to build education and talent pipelines for regional locations.Broaden Australias agriculture export focus model the impacts of consolidation and diversification on exports,design policies that balance IP protection with knowledge sharing and collaboration,promote Australian sustainability and biosecurity credentials that can be evidenced by producers with minimal cost and effort.Establish support from finance and diversified income streams understand the settings needed from finance and insurance industries to support farm viability and resilience under various climate change and geopolitical scenarios.Recommended areas for policy and R&DThe shifts listed below do not offer all the solutions.Instead they present the types of changes,assumptions tests,and initiatives required.They draw on the insights developed during the co-design workshops and CSIROs research and reflect existing aspirations for Australian agriculture.Significant effort and actions are required from Australias agriculture innovation system to turn these aspirations into strong long-term sector plans for achieving the more desirable future outcomes and avoiding the less desirable ones for Australian farming systems by 2050.x Ag2050 ScenariosReport RegionsA regional shift will enable well-connected and vibrant regional communities that offer quality jobs,lifestyle amenities,education,and other services.Target investment in infrastructure map and assess regional centres to identify potential for growth and investment from agriculture and other sectors,tosupport other centres that are at risk of marginalisation and find new ways to connect and engage city-based communities better with agriculture.Leverage mixed land use opportunities harness land use mixes that leverage the energy transition and allow for more diverse income streams and quality jobs in regional areas,adopting relevant best practice from overseas around good planning and investment decisions.Whole-of-systemA whole-of-system shift will mean the agricultural system has the planning and investment to achieve step changes towards long-term transformation.Renew strategy guidelines build on available strategic planning and forsighting tools,such as the future scenarios contained in this report,to enable industry,research organisations and government to develop effective strategy and standard evaluation frameworks in response to transformational and cross-commodity priorities.Restructuring the agricultural R&D system identify,evaluate and implement the strategy,structures,interactions,funding models,roles and responsibilities across Australian agriculture innovation needed for effective responses to cross-sector challenges and opportunities.Strengthen relationships and dialogue with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander partners incorporate Indigenous led co-design and research into the development of opportunities and re-engage with traditional methods to advance sustainable farming practices.Productive,resilient and sustainable farming systems in 2050Ultimately,achieving the most optimistic future isplausible if significant action is taken by Australianagriculture.Thiswill require long-term strategic planning across the fundamental shifts:climateadaptation,land and seas,industry,andregions.Theexpertise,experience and energy needed to achieve the more positive outcomes described in this report extend beyond any single organisation.Effective and urgent collaborative effort is needed from both public and private sector organisations.Over the next few years,the Ag2050 program will continue to iterate these initial future scenarios through modelling and consultation to inform the policy and research and development(R&D)actions required by industry and government to facilitate a preferable future.xiGlossaryAbsolute emissionsRefers to the total amount of greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere from a specific sector or activity over a specific period(tonnes CO2eq).AgShort reference to agriculture.Agriculture The practice of cultivating soil,raising livestock for food,fibre and other products.Includesfishery and forestry industries.AgritechModern tools,technologies,business models and farming practices in agriculture to enhance and optimise agricultural activities.AIArtificial intelligence.A general-purpose technology that uses data-driven algorithms to autonomously solve problems and perform tasks without explicit human guidance.Includes machine learning,computer vision,natural language processing,robotics and deeplearning.Alien speciesNon-native organisms introduced by humans(intentionally or accidentally)to an ecosystem,region or country outside of their usual habitats.AquacultureThe rearing of aquatic animals or the cultivation of aquatic plants for food.Arable landLand capable of producing agricultural crops.ASEANAssociation of Southeast Asian NationsBiotechnologyDescribes the process of using living things to create or change products.Bio-economy Leveraging biological resources for the development of goods and services.Carbon sequestrationA natural or artificial process by which carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere and held in solid or liquid form(i.e.captured by soils or seas).Circular economyA regenerative productionconsumption system in which inputs and outputs are minimised.Climate adaptationProcess of modifying agricultural and natural systems to mitigate the negative impacts of climatechange.Climate mitigationActions taken to reduce or prevent greenhouse gas emissions and impacts from agriculture on climate systems,with the goal of preventing further climate change.Complementary proteins Non-animal,plant-based and novel proteins created from advanced biomanufacturing processes using yeast,fungi,algae and insects.CRCs The Cooperative Research Centres program.An Australian Government initiative started in the 1990s to fund industry-led collaborations with researchers and end-users.Ecosystem servicesThe benefits gained from nature,such as food,water,air and soil,that directly and indirectly contribute to human well-being,survival and quality of life.Emissions intensity The amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced per unit of production activities,measuring how efficiently processes or industries generate emissions relative to output.Farming system A complex and interrelated set of agricultural activities,practices and resources used to produce agricultural products.For this report,includes forestry and fisheries systems.FarmerA person engaged in agriculture or forestry,often owning or managing a farm enterprise ranging from small family farms to large commercial operations.FisherA person engaged in commercial fishing or aquaculture.xii Ag2050 ScenariosReport Friend-shoringA trade practice where supply chain networks are focused on countries regarded as political and economic allies,to strengthen and build on-shore resilience.Marginal landLand that has little to no agricultural or industrial value.Mixed farmingThe combination of different types of agricultural activity,often crops and livestock,within a single farm instead of specialising in one type of crop or livestock at any one time.Net emissionsThe amount of greenhouse gas emissions considering the removal of such gases during a defined period.Non-arable landLand not suitable for crop production,including meadows,pastures and woody vegetation.NTMsNon-tariff measures.Policy measures,other than customs duties,used to regulate and control imports and exports,including regulations,standards,licensing requirements andquotas.OECDThe Organisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentProducerAn individual or entity that produces agricultural products from farming,forestry,aquaculture etc.Unlike farmer,producer refers to both land and sea-based activities.RDCsRural research and development corporations R&DResearch and development SeasSaltwater sources covering the earth(i.e.oceans and seas).SPSSanitary and phytosanitary measuresSustainable intensificationThe process or system of increasing agricultural yields without adverse environmental impacts and without conversion of additional land.Total factor productivity A measure of how efficiently outputs are produced using inputs.WatersInland waters including rivers,creeks,underground sources and lakes.xiiixiv Ag2050 ScenariosReport 1 IntroductionThe Ag2050 Scenarios Report explores significant trends,risks and opportunities to identify the key shifts and actions needed to support Australian farming systems into the future.It seeks to answer the question:what could Australian farming systems look like to be productive,resilient and sustainable in 2050?Thisreport combines research by CSIRO with input from leaders and organisations across the Australian agriculture industry,research and government sectors to develop a set of evidence-based,plausible scenarios for what Australian farming systems could look like in 2050.This report and its scenarios aim to motivate further discussion on securing Australian agricultures long-term prosperity.The imperative for Australian agriculture Agriculture in Australia has seen several years of relatively high yield and profitability benefitting from an emphasis on adaptation and leading innovation.However,there are some key long-term threats to farm productivity,resilience and sustainability that are already impacting the farming,fisheries and forestry systems.Climate change is growing as a significant threat as weather conditions and natural disasters become more frequent or disastrous,exacerbating biodiversity loss and environmental degradation.The agriculture and land sectors may provide effective solutions to support other industries in achieving long-term net-zero targets.Uncertainty in the long-term geopolitical outlook is growing as a threat to Australias export-orientated agricultural industries.Recent geopolitical shocks from the UkraineRussia war and COVID-19 are examples of the risks posed to the supply of key inputs such as fertilisers and pesticides and to key trade relationships.2 CSIRO(2021)Labour impacts on agriculture.(accessed March 2024).3 Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics(ABARES)(2021)Growth juggernaut:three billion empowered consumers.(accessed March 2024).4 Australian Farm Institute(AFI)(2019)Submission:perspectives on growing agriculture to a$100 billion industry by 2030.(accessed March 2024).Even before COVID-19,the sector faced constrained labour availability.2 As the median age of the Australia agricultural workforce continues to rise,barriers to entry of diverse and skilled workers will exacerbate the existing labour gap and impact innovation and adoption of new technologies,as well as the long-term productivity of the sector.Rising incomes in Asia will shift demand and expectations for Australias food and fibre exports.The sector is well positioned to benefit,especially from growing demand for proteins.Challenges may arise,however,in maintaining trust and reputation for Australian produce and responding to changes in consumer demand in time to maintain favourable market access.3 Innovation timelines for agriculture are long and the net production gain of 24%per annum over the past 20 years will not be enough to maintain a competitive position in key export markets nor achieve shorter term industry growth targets.4 Astep change in the pace of innovation is needed.1Australia will need to transform its current farming systems to respond to these complex and long-term challenges and deliver against the sustainability,productivity and profitability needs of 2050.Australian farming systems are complex and interconnected.They cover soil,water,crops,livestock,machinery,energy,labour,capital and other inputs and are influenced by a range of other systems such as political,economic,institutional and social systems.This report considers land-based farming systems as well as aquaculture,forestry and fisheries.These systems are critical components of wider and equally complex domestic and global agrifood systems that connect production to consumption.Over the past decades,farming systems in Australia have become highly efficient and globally competitive.Australias research and innovation capabilities have been a significant contributor to this growth and prosperity.$2.3 billion was invested in agriculture research and development(R&D)in 202223.This included$1.3billion in public funding and$1 billion in private funding,5 with$500 million in levy payments made by agriculture industries.6 This money goes towards Australian and state government entities,including CSIRO,universities,Rural Research and Development Corporations(RDCs)and Cooperative Research Centres(CRCs)and the private sector.The Rural RDC Vision 2050 report and the EY Agricultural Innovation report suggest that an important feature of Australias agricultural R&D system is that it was not established as a coherent system but developed through a collection of interconnected and independently managed components,each following a variety of strategic priorities to fund,facilitate and deliver R&D.7 This has led to siloed and disjointed innovation and funding focused on commodity groups and short-or medium-term targets.Strengthened capacity is needed across the agricultural industries to adapt and transform in response to growing uncertainty and risk in a globally changing world.To prepare for multiple future scenarios,it will be important to rebalance and align the current Australian agriculture innovation system around cross-sectoral,long-term challenges and opportunities.To define and lead this industry transformation,a whole-of-system coordinated approach across the breadth of research and innovation that applies to farming systems is needed.This report does not predict what Australian farming systems will look like in 2050 nor does it propose a single future vision for the Australian agriculture innovation system.Instead,it aims to motivate conversations between industry,researchers and government on what actions are needed to secure a desirable future for Australian farming systems.The overall goal is to expand the scope and urgency of collaborative and strategic thinking on a whole-of-system plan for effective transformative change of the Australian agriculture innovation system.Report methodology This report was developed using a highly collaborative approach that combined input from participants of a co-design workshop series with a literature review and scenario analysis(Figure 1).Although these scenarios will have implications across Australias agrifood value chains,including food processing and manufacturing,the scope of this report is pre-farm gate.As the initial phase of the Ag2050 program,the future scenarios in this report are presented qualitatively.It is acknowledged that quantitative assessment,modelling and testing are essential steps to further validate and refine these scenarios.By sharing qualitative insights first,this report aims to showcase the diverse views and creative thinking of stakeholders involved in the project.This approach not only fosters transparency but also invites collaboration and feedback from a wider range of organisations and experts.Sharing this report prior to conducting quantitative analysis allows conversations to begin,laying the groundwork for collaborative efforts as the Ag2050 program moves forward with the quantitative phase of scenario testing and downscaling.5 ABARES(2023)Agricultural research and development investment in Australia:20222023 update.(accessed 20 February 2024).6 Department of Agriculture,Fisheries and Forestry(DAFF).About levies and the levy system.(accessed 20 February 2024).7 Ernst&Young(EY)(2019)Agricultural innovation:a national approach to grow Australias future.(accessed 8 February 2024);Rural RDC(2018)Vision 2050.(accessed 8 February 2024).2 Ag2050 ScenariosReport Figure 1:Co-design methodologyA broad horizon scan,including literature review and consultations with a range of experts and stakeholders,was used to identify global and national forces megatrends,factors and influences that would impact the future of agriculture.In early workshops,participants further developed these forces,initially brainstorming over 100 ideas and ultimately developing them into a set of 14 drivers.These were categorised under five broad areas:global context,environment and climate,land and water,innovation and productivity,and trade and market access.Many of the drivers are internal forces that Australian agriculture can influence.But there are also external forces,particularly the drivers included under global context,that are outside the control of the sector.There is some overlap and interconnectedness of drivers and they are not mutually exclusive.These drivers will shape the direction and speed of change across Australian farming systems to 2050 and are the foundational pillars of the future scenarios in this report.There are various outcomes the drivers may lead to by 2050.Two or more contrasting and alternative outcomes were developed for each driver to align with relevant trends.These outcomes were tested and iterated based on recent literature,participant guidance and the assistance of internal researchers from CSIRO.The driver outcomes were combined into logical groupings to construct an initial set of over 30 scenarios that described a range of plausible futures for Australian farming systems.Co-design workshop seriesLiterature reviewFirst round consultationsRefine to four scenariosSecond round consultationsReviews,report draftingBrainstorm key drivers and influencing factorsRefine and define to top prioritiesDefine plausible and contrasting outcomesIdeate future scenarios,signposts and implications1234Throughfurther co-design workshops and consultations,the scenarios were iterated and refined to a final set of four scenarios that participants considered best explored valuable contrasts and trade-offs.The outcomes and implications of the future scenarios were developed with participant guidance and CSIRO research using published literature,recent trends and consultations.It should be noted that although the final four future scenarios included in this report cover a wide range of plausible outcomes,they are not mutually exclusive nor exhaustive of the possibilities there are likely many other plausible futures.This report involved CSIRO research,including the Australian National Outlook,State of the Climate report and the Our Future World report,input from the Department of Agriculture,Fisheries and Forestry,policymakers and participants to identify how the research community and industry could fully use these scenarios and achieve the more desirable and avoid the less desirable outcomes presented in the scenarios.This led to a set of initial action areas,including building upon existing initiatives,which would be required to identify and pursue the future Australia wants for its farming systems.These action areas form the basis of the five shifts described in this report.3Engaging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoplesWhere possible,further detail on integrating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander opportunities will be drawn out in future work as part of the Ag2050 program.The program aims to ensure that the opportunity for collaboration to incorporate Indigenous knowledge and land management practices into future farming systems is adequately explored and aligns with the goals and objectives of local Indigenous community groups.Assuch,the program is addressing this through an in-depth network analysis and collaborative process to establish an Indigenous-led Steering Committee.Delivered under the leadership of an Indigenous Research Scientist,this initiative will take a relationship-first approach,where building trust and understanding with Indigenous partners is the runway for all subsequent activities.Further engagement activities with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders and organisations,including grassroots organisations from across Country,will be designed to encourage two-way learning between CSIRO and Indigenous partners.Adata-sharing framework will be co-developed with the Indigenous-led Steering Committee and with support from existing CSIRO research in this space.Tocontribute to this process,email Ag2050csiro.au.As we move forward,we pledge to commit our efforts to bridge these gaps.We will strive for an approach that not only reaches out but also resonates with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples,fostering meaningful collaboration for the benefit of current and future generations.This commitment is fundamental to the integrity and success of the Ag2050 Initiative.During the preliminary phase of Ag2050,we identified gaps in our engagement efforts.We specifically acknowledge the absence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices in our initial discussions.It is clear that a one-size-fits-all approach to stakeholder engagement is insufficient.Engaging meaningfully with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples requires dedicated time and culturally centred methodologies.We acknowledge with respect the vital contributions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples,whose Indigenous ways of knowing,being and doing have nurtured Country for thousands of years.TheAg2050 Initiative is keenly aware of the importance of these traditions in shaping a sustainable future for agriculture and food systems in Australia.In line with this,we are committed to the principles of Caring for Country,bolstering economic strength and enhancing food security and nutrition within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.This intention recognises that we are on a journey with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander partners and that the scenarios outlined in our report are starting points for deeper dialogue to explore their pivotal role in fostering sustainable agricultural practices.Weunderstand that incorporating Indigenous-led co-design is essential for a just and effective development of these opportunities.Theres an established and growing field of Indigenous-led research advocating for a re-engagement with these traditional methods to advance sustainable farming across Australia.Indigenous agricultural techniques,honed over tens of thousands of years connecting land,sea,sky,waterways and cultural laws,can offer invaluable insights into planning for the future with our Ag2050 program.4 Ag2050 ScenariosReport How to read this report3.Finally,explore the five fundamental shifts Australia needs to make to identify and pursue the future it wants for its farming systems in Chapter 4 Considerations.Five shifts were developed,drawing on insights from the co-design workshops and CSIROs research:climate adaptation,land and water,industry,regions and whole-of-system change.A set of action areas was defined for each fundamental shift.These action areas are not exhaustive,but help to articulate the initial changes,assumptions testing and initiatives required.Ultimately,achieving the most optimistic future is plausible for Australian agriculture.However,it will require significant effort,collaboration and action across the public and private sectors.This report starts by presenting the key national and global forces impacting the future of Australian farming systems.The plausible outcomes of these key drivers of change form the foundational pillars of the four future scenarios presented later in the report.1.Start by diving into the national and global forces that will impact the future of Australian farming systems in Chapter2 Priorities for Australian agriculture.These forces cover five overarching areas:the global context,environment and climate,land and water,productivity and innovation,and trade and market access.The direction,pace and plausible future outcomes of these trends and forces will shape Australias farming systems out to 2050.2.Next,immerse yourself in the four contrasting future scenarios in Chapter 3 Future scenarios.These scenarios are evidence-based and plausible explorations of what Australian farming systems could look like by 2050.Although some may have more desirable elements than others,it is important to note that there is no one preferred future scenario and every scenario presents trade-offs.What is possible for Australian farming if the agriculture innovation system achieves its full potential?Scenario 1 Regional Ag capitals Scenario 2 Landscape stewardship What can be achieved with incremental innovation and proactive climate adaptation?Scenario 3 Climate survivalWhat if agriculture fails to effectively respond to the challenges and needs of 2050?Scenario 4 System declineEach scenario contains key signposts and implications.Signposts are the unique trends,events or signals that could indicate the sector is on a pathway to the future described in the scenarios.Implications highlight the key trade-offs and consequences of each scenario.5This report presents four scenarios:Regional Ag capitals and Landscape stewardship in which farming systems transform in different ways to reach new heights of potential;Climate survival in which systems successfully adapt and produce in the face of climate change;and System decline in which systems fail to build resilience to external factors.There are three main points to consider across these future scenarios.The value in these scenarios is not in determining an optimal future,but in understanding the implications of setting different priorities and the associated tradeoffs:Each of the scenarios presents a mix of desirable and less desirable components.Considered together,the scenarios can help identify various potential key roles for the Australian agriculture sector into the future,develop proactive actions needed to pursue more positive future outcomes and identify the no-regret actions needed to avoid the impacts of a less desirable future.The future of agriculture may be a combination of the four scenarios,depending on the regional,industry and global context,and the extent of actions taken by the sector.But it is the trade-offs within these scenarios that can facilitate richer decision-making on which future the agriculture sector wants to pursue.The sector can achieve positive future outcomes despite global uncertainties:The future of Australian agriculture will be affected by external global forces outside its control.The sector,however,can control how it responds to the global context to improve the outcomes for farming systems.Stakeholders that participated in the development of this report expect global uncertainty and volatility to continue to rise between now and 2050.To make the scenarios more manageable,testable and comparable,all scenarios are set in the same global context.Although other global contexts are plausible,the future scenarios presented in this report are a starting point for considering how farming systems are impacted by a variety of global factors.The productivity,resilience,and sustainability of Australian agriculture can and must be strengthened,which requires immediate action and longterm planning:Achieving the more positive outcomes described in this report is beyond the scope of any single organisation.It will require significant expertise,experience,energy and a collaborative effort across both public and private sector organisations.This report does not address every trend,challenge or plausible future,nor offer all the solutions.Instead,it aims to motivate discussion and identify questions for further research and discussion.Three points to consider throughout this report 6 Ag2050 ScenariosReport 2 Priorities for Australian agricultureThe past successes of Australian agriculture and several recent years of high yields and profitability conceal the disruption Australian farming systems face now and in the future.Multiple global and national forces impact Australian farming and fisheries systems.These forces are complex and interconnected.Together they are escalating risk to the long-term productivity,resilience and sustainability of the agriculture sector.Yet they also create opportunities for Australian agriculture to innovate farming systems,develop new sources of growth,protect and restore Australias natural resources and ensure the long-term viability of the sector.Through a literature review and an extensive consultation period,experts and stakeholders viewed five overarching areas as critical priorities for Australian agriculture:global context environment and climate land and water productivity and innovation trade and market access.Across these five areas,14 drivers of change were developed,covering the breadth of factors and trends influencing Australian farming systems(Figure 2).The pace and direction of these drivers will impact the future outcomes for Australian farming and fisheries systems to 2050.This chapter provides an overview of these drivers and the challenges and sectoral opportunities they may bring.Figure 2:The five priority areas and the associated drivers of changeAlthough the agriculture,forestry and fisheries industries face similar threats,the impacts of these threats can vary,particularly for fisheries and aquaculture.For specific insights into how these drivers impact fisheries and aquaculture,see Box 1.Global contextGeopolitical uncertaintyGlobal climate actionConsumer demandPriority areasDriversEnvironment and climateLand and waterProductivity and innovationTrade and market accessClimate change adaptationAgriculture sector emissions reduction Natural resource and landscape stewardshipLand and sea use competition and value Production mix and intensityWater access and useTechnology driven productivityHuman capitalIntegration and consolidationTrade barriersTrade relationships7Global contextAustralias ability to secure critical agricultural inputs and to export produce is susceptible to external global forces,including global climate action,consumer demands and geopolitical uncertainty.Australia is recognised globally as a producer of high-quality,safe food and fibre,and a significant contributor to global food security.Agriculture in Australia is heavily export-orientated and the shifts and demands of the export market greatly influence Australian producers.Exports account for 72%of the total value of agriculture,including forestry and fisheries,representing 11.6%of total goods and services exported.8 Recent impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic and the UkraineRussia war have highlighted the susceptibility of the Australian agriculture sector to global fluctuations and disruptions.9 How the agricultural industries,and Australia more broadly,respond to global forces is critical for the long-term profitability,sustainability and resilience of Australian farming systems.Human-induced global warming has caused Australias climate to warm by an average of 1.4C since national records began in 1910,10 with surrounding ocean temperatures also increasing.The latest United Nations Environment Programme report shows that despite numerous worldwide initiatives,11 it is likely that global warming will exceed 1.5C.As stated in the 2022 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report,global pathways that limit global warming to 1.5C or even 2C involve almost immediate reductions in greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors.12 Mitigating further warming of Australias climate depends greatly on effective and equitable global collaboration that delivers rapid and sustained transformation across all sectors.An increasing global population and a growing middle class are shifting the demand profile of agriculture export markets and the preferences that exporters must meet to remain competitive.The total global food demand is expected to increase by 3556tween 2010 and 2050.13 At the same time,a rise in average global incomes is expected to add over 3 billion new middle-class consumers by 2050,14 primarily in Asia.15 As consumers become wealthier in developing nations,their diets are diversifying16 and they are demanding premium,sustainable and healthy foods at a competitive price.Geopolitical uncertainty increases as global economic and political relationships become more complex and volatile.The current,dynamic multipolar world is dominated by seven global powers:the United States,China,India,the European Union,Brazil,Indonesia and Russia.Together they account for over two-thirds of global economic activity.17 As they pursue their interests,they are disrupting the previous certainties of the rules-based international order.To build resilience to these shifting geopolitical settings,Australian producers are looking to increase diversification of agricultural export partners(see Trade and market access).Australia is already seeing an increasing value of exports to the Middle East,Africa and the ASEAN region compared to recent years(Figure 3).The risk for countries,including Australia,in navigating their relationships with these growing powers is becoming increasingly complex.18 8 ABARES(2023)Snapshot of Australian Agriculture 2023.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).9 Naughtin C,Hajkowicz S,Schleiger E,Bratanova A,Cameron A,Zamin T,Dutta A(2022)Our Future World:Global Megatrends Impacting the Way We Live Over ComingDecades.CSIRO Publishing,Brisbane,Australia.10 CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology(BOM)(2022)State of the Climate.Australia:Government of Australia.(accessed 13 March 2024).11 United Nations Environment Programme(2023)Emissions Gap Report 2023:Broken record Temperatures hit new highs,yet world fails to cut emissions(again),Nairobi.(accessed 12 December 2023).12 IPCC(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)(2023)AR6 Synthesis Report Climate Change 2023.(accessed 12 December 2023).13 Van Dijk M,Morley T,Rau ML(2021)A meta-analysis of projected global food demand and population at risk of hunger for the period 2010-2050.Naturefood 2,494-501.(accessed 23 January 2024).14 Hatfield-Dodds S,Hajkowicz S,Eady S(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).15 Hafi A,Parker J,Fell J,Duver A,Addai D(2023)What Asia wants:long-term agrifood demand in Asia(2023 revision).ABARES Research Report 23.10,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).16 Herforth A,Ahmed S(2015)The food environment,its effects on dietary consumption,and potential for measurement within agriculture:nutrition interventions.Food Section(7),505520.(accessed 12 December 2023).17 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).18 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).8 Ag2050 ScenariosReport Figure 3:Australian exports have increased to the Middle East,Africa and the ASEAN regionNotes:Figure shows the export value of Australian agriculture,fisheries and forestry by destination between 2018 and 2021.The category ASEAN comprises the 10 member states and East Timor.19 ChallengesA lack of global action and collaboration to curb global warming will lead to numerous impacts on Australias climate and environment,including the expansion of pests and diseases,increasing biosecurity risks,marine heatwaves and an increase in extreme fire weather.20 Withoutasignificant reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions,Australian farms could face global warming scenarios of over 2C by 2050.21 Although farmers in some regions may derive short-term gains from increasing temperatures,in the long term,Australian farms,the ecosystem services they depend on and regional communities will be under increasing stress to navigate and adapt to more frequent or extreme weather events.22 Intensified competition for resources such as arable land and water access rights may drive up the price of land and water and this,in turn,can damage the viability and profitability of farms.23 These impacts threaten farming and fisheries systems and will likely increase costs associated with climate adaptation and planning(see Environment and climate).24 Consumer trends and stringent trade requirements will dictate farming systems actions around sustainability and welfare,biosecurity and traceability to remain competitive.25 The sector will need to build and strengthen a global green and clean brand to meet the preferences of the increasingly wealthy middle-class populations in Asia.26 Australia has a strong environmental sustainability record,including efficient use of pesticides and fertilisers,low-tillage practices and below-average emission intensities for several commodity groups compared to major developed country producers.27 Maintaining a competitive sustainable and healthy brand will require proactively responding to the changing climate by collaborating and investing in mitigation and adaptation efforts,as well as investing in national biosecurity monitoring and prevention measures.28 010203040502017201820192020OthersMiddle East and AfricaASEANChinaKoreaJapanUSEU 28AUD BILLIONS19 ABARES(2022)Agricultural commodities and trade data.(accessed 20 January 2024).20 CSIRO,BOM(2022)State of the Climate.Australia:Government of Australia.(accessed 13 March 2024).21 Lee JY,Marotzke J,Bala G,Cao L,Corti S,Dunne JP,Engelbrecht F,Fischer E,Fyfe JC,Jones C,Maycock A,Mutemi J,Ndiaye O,Panickal S,Zhou T(2021)Future global climate:scenario-based projections and near-term information.(accessed 24 Jan 2024);United Nations Environment Programme(2023)Emissions Gap Report 2023:Broken record Temperatures hit new highs,yet world fails to cut emissions(again).Nairobi.(accessed 12 December 2023);Matches IPCC scenarios for SSP3-7.0.22 Naughtin et al.(2022)Our Future World:Global Megatrends Impacting the Way We Live Over ComingDecades.CSIRO,Brisbane,Australia.23 ABARES(2023)Snapshot of Australian Agriculture 2023.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023);Naughtin et al.(2022)Our Future World:Global Megatrends Impacting the Way We Live Over ComingDecades.CSIRO,Brisbane,Australia.24 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).25 Fell J(2022)Analysis of Australias Future Agricultural Trade Advantage.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023);National Farmers Federation(NFF)(2018)2030 Roadmap:Australian agricultures plan for a$100 billion industry.Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).26 NFF(2018)2030 Roadmap:Australian agricultures plan for a$100 billion industry.Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).27 Read A,Rollan J,Creed C,Fell J(2023)Sustainability and Agri-environmental Indicators:International Comparisons.ABARES Insights,Issue 2,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 13 March 2024).28 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).9At a national level,government and industry representatives will be challenged with negotiating and cooperating with various global partners to stabilise supply chains and maintain access to key export markets.29 Escalating protectionist policies and a volatile geopolitical context weaken economic cooperation and trade liberalisation.30 Ongoing disruptions and unpredictability,driven by geopolitical conflicts,can impact major trade and supply chain routes,31 which in turn can limit Australian farmers access to crucial agricultural inputs such as fertilisers and chemicals,leading to lower crop yields and export potential.32 It can also hinder the ability of Australian agricultural exporters to deliver their goods using timely and efficient freight,subsequently impacting profit margins and product integrity.33 OpportunitiesAustralia cannot directly influence the pace or success of global action on climate change.It can,however,strive towards reducing its own contribution to global warming through net zero strategies.Across the Australian economy,science,innovation and strategy are already driving changes.34 The agriculture sector has opportunities available to indirectly influence the direction of global climate action,including supporting the growth of low-carbon export industries such as sustainable aviation fuels,participating in low-waste,circular food systems,and decarbonising heavy freight transport further down the supply chain.35 Reducing and sequestering emissions,and restoring environments,provide additional opportunities to target products to environmentally conscious consumers(see Trade and market access).36By understanding the shifting preferences of the growing middle-class populations in Asia and responding in time,the sector can secure its position as a supplier of high-quality food and fibre goods to these high-value export markets.For example,to meet the growing demand for proteins,Australian producers have an opportunity to supply complementary proteins to middle-class consumers.37 The rapidly growing complementary protein market is expected to grow by$3.1 billion in 2030.38 Complementary proteins can provide producers an opportunity to grow into value-added industries,with higher and less volatile prices than commodity markets.However,the extent to which the sector can capitalise on demand from the growing middle class will depend,in part,on the sectors ability to navigate new geopolitical uncertainties and to maintain and build positive trade relationships with multiple established and growing economies.29 Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade(2023)World Trade Organisation.(accessed 12 December 2023);CSIRO(2019)Australian National Outlook.CSIRO,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023);Naughtin et al.(2022)Our Future World:Global Megatrends Impacting the Way We Live Over ComingDecades.CSIRO,Brisbane,Australia.30 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).31 CSIRO(2019)Australian National Outlook.CSIRO,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).32 Greenville J,Cameron A(2022)Where to Next for Australian Agriculture?ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).33 Greenville J,Cameron A(2022)Where to Next for Australian Agriculture?ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023);Naughtin et al.(2022)Our Future World:Global Megatrends Impacting the Way We Live Over ComingDecades.CSIRO,Brisbane,Australia.34 DAFF(2024)Agriculture and land sectoral plan.(accessed 5 March 2024).35 CSIRO(2023)Sustainable aviation fuel opportunities for Australia.(accessed March 2024);CSIRO(2023)Reshaping Australian food systems.(accessed March 2024).36 Fell J(2022)Analysis of Australias Future Agricultural Trade Advantage.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023);Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).37 Lawrence S(2021)Australian agriculture&alternative proteins:a view for the future.Food Frontier,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).38 Admassu S,Fox T,Heath R,McRobert K(2020)The changing landscape of protein production:opportunities and challenges for Australian agriculture.AgriFutures,Australia Publication No.20-001.(accessed 12 March 2024).10 Ag2050 ScenariosReport Environment and climateAustralias natural environment and climate are vital in sustaining the agricultural industries now and into the future.Today,agriculture faces significant challenges due to climate change,deteriorating natural resources and pressures to decarbonise.Shifts in rainfall and temperature patterns have been shown to affect farmer incomes,with recent short-term favourable conditions reflected in record profits.39 However,over the past two decades,average annual farm profits have reduced by an estimated 23%,with persistent climate variability predicted to double the risk of meagre farm returns compared to the past 50 years.40 Droughts,floods,fires and sea levels are all increasing and tropical cyclones are becoming less frequent but potentially more intense.41 To remain productive and resilient into the future,Australian agriculture faces the challenge of balancing more diversified production methods and income sources,contributing to meeting Australias national emissions reduction targets and implementing effective management practices for soil health,water access,biodiversity and land restoration.Between 1910 and 2022,the average Australian temperature increased by 1.4C and since 1970 there has been a 20%and 10%reduction in winter rainfall in south-western Australia and south-eastern Australia,respectively.42 Airpollution is expected to worsen as climate change causes greater natural emissions from dust,biogenic sources and bushfires.43 Essential ecosystem services continue to decline,including terrestrial,vegetation and freshwater ecosystems,due to intense competition.44 Landdegradation and intensive land use have led to erosion,acidification,compaction and nutrient decline of land,along with the loss of biodiversity.45 Australia has the highest rate of species decline among the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD)countries,with these losses expected to continue to 2050.46In 2023,agriculture contributed 18%to Australias net greenhouse gas emissions,47 mostly arising from methane and nitrous oxide from livestock feed consumption and the decay or combustion of living and dead biomass(Figure 4).Over the past 27 years,the sector has reduced greenhouse gas emissions intensity(emission as a proportion of value added by the sector)by 63%(Figure 5),largely attributed to a decline in livestock numbers associated with multiple droughts across Australia.48 Projection estimates suggest a 3cline in total agricultural emissions by 2035.49 Continuing efforts to further reduce emissions from agricultural activities involve investments in carbon sequestration,complementary protein use,integrated management systems,low-emission technologies,land use changes and a federal commitment to achieving net zero by 2050.50 39 ABARES(2023)Snapshot of Australian Agriculture 2023.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).40 Hughes N(2021)Analysis of Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation on Australian Farms.Department of Agriculture,Water and the Environment(DAWE),Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).41 CSIRO,BOM(2022)State of the Climate.Australia:Government of Australia.(accessed 13 March 2024).42 Hughes N(2021)Analysis of Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation on Australian Farms.DAWE,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).43 Department of Climate Change,Energy,the Environment and Water(DCCEEW)(2021)Australia State of the Environment 2021:air quality.(accessed 30 January 2024).44 Cresswell ID,Janke T,Johnston EL(2021)Australia state of the environment 2021:overview.Independent report to the Australian Government Minister forthe Environment,Commonwealth of Australia,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).45 Cresswell ID,Janke T,Johnston EL(2021)Australia state of the environment 2021:Overview.Independent report to the Australian Government Minister forthe Environment,Commonwealth of Australia,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).46 DCCEEW(2021)Australia State of the Environment 2021:Biodiversity.(accessed 30 January 2024).47 DCCEEW(2023)Australias Emissions Projections 2023.DCCEEW,Canberra.(accessed 13 March 2024).48 DCCEEW(2023)National Inventory Report:2021.(accessed 31 January 2024);NFF(2018)2030 Roadmap:Australian Agricultures Plan for a$100 Billion Industry.Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).49 DCCEEW(2023)Australias Emissions Projections 2023.DCCEEW,Canberra.(accessed 13 March 2024).50 Commonwealth of Australia(2023)National Statement on Climate Change and Agriculture.DAFF,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).11Figure 4:Absolute emissions in agriculture are dominated by the livestock sectorNotes:Figure shows absolute or actual emissions in the agriculture sector by sources for the year 2023.51 Livestock and livestockproducts 84%Crops 6%Other 2%Lime and urea 4rtilisers 4%phytoplankton,challenging Australias fish supply(seeBox 1 for more information on the fisheries sector).55 The compounding effect of multiple environmental changes increases the pressure on farming systems.Emissions in the agriculture sector are hard to abate.Some emissions from on-farm activities may be mitigated by electrifying small farm vehicles and some farm machinery and switching to renewable fuels,but solutions to reduce emissions from ruminant livestock and fertilisers that suit the Australian farming context are yet to be scaled and adopted.Producers will require support to navigate the costs and knowledge burden of implementing new processes,systems and equipment to mitigate on-farm greenhouse emissions and to comply with global reduction policies and consumer expectations.If the sector does not reduce its emissions,export opportunities will be impacted by the growing number of import tariffs on emissions-intensive goods such as red meat.56 OpportunitiesThrough climate change adaptation and natural resource and landscape stewardship,there is an opportunity to improve ecosystem health,protect farm productivity and capitalise on new climate-and service-related industries.For example,there is an opportunity to advance agricultural innovation,improve crop resilience in extreme climates and safeguard communities dependent on agricultural produce by proactively investing in the development of the Australian synthetic biology industry.57 Withgreater soil management techniques(conservation tillage,organic soil enrichment,carbon sequestration),there is an opportunity to restore landscape health,increase soil resilience to climate change,improve water storage and filtration and improve crop production.58 51 DCCEEW(2023)Australias emissions projections 2023.DCCEEW,Canberra.(accessed 20 January 2024).52 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).53 Australian Government(2023)The Basin.Murray-Darling Basin Authority.(accessed 12 December 2023);Mallawaarachchi T,Auricht C,Loch A,Adamson D,Quiggin J(2020)Water allocation in Australias Murray-Darling Basin:managing change under heightened uncertainty.Economic Analysis and Policy(66),345369.54 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO)(2015)Intergovernmental Technical Panel on Soils(ITPS)Status of the Worlds Soil Resources(SWSR)Main Report:FAO and ITPS;DCCEEW(2021)Australia State of the Environment 2021:land.(accessed 13 March 2024);CSIRO(2019)Australian National Outlook.CSIRO,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).55 Naughtin et al.(2022)Our Future World:Global Megatrends Impacting the Way We Live Over ComingDecades.CSIRO,Brisbane,Australia.56 Wood T,Reeve A,Ha J(2021)Towards Net Zero:Practical Policies to Reduce Agricultural Emissions.Grattan Institute,Melbourne,Australia.57 CSIRO Futures(2021)A National Synthetic Biology Roadmap:Identifying Commercial and Economic Opportunities for Australia.CSIRO,Canberra,Australia.58 DAWE(2021)National Soil Strategy.DAWE,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 7 March 2024).ChallengesExtreme climate events challenge the profitability of the agricultural sector and limit the productive capacity of Australias growing regions.Hotter conditions have reduced the profitability of broadacre farming by 22tween 2000 and 2019,relative to pre-2000 data.52 Increasing variability in rainfall patterns is challenging water availability and elevating water scarcity concerns in the Murray-Darling Basin,a key agricultural area supplying 40%of produce in Australia.53 Without a strong focus on landscape stewardship and maintaining the ecosystem services relied upon by farming systems,the ongoing viability of agricultural industries is at risk.Acidification,salinity,erosion and loss of organic carbon matter are causing soil health to decline,limiting crop choices and yields.54 Rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations increase ocean acidity and damage 12 Ag2050 ScenariosReport 59 ABARES(2022)Agricultural commodity statistics.DAFF,Canberra.(accessed 20 January 2024);DCCEEW(2023)Actual emissions for the agriculture sector.DCCEEW,Canberra.(accessed 20 January 2024).60 CSIRO(2022)About the Indigenous seasonal calendars.(accessed 6 March 2024).61 Hughes N,Lu M,Soh WY,Lawson K(2022)Modelling the effects of climate change on the profitability of Australian farms.Climatic Change 172,12.62 Hughes N,Gooday P(2021)Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation on Australian Farms.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 31 January 2024).63 CSIRO(2019)Australian National Outlook.CSIRO,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).64 Fitch P,Battaglia M,Lenton A,Feron P,Gao L,Mei Y,Hortle A,Macdonald L,Pearce M,Occhipinti S,Roxburgh S,Steven A(2022)Australias Sequestration Potential.CSIRO.(accessed 13 March 2024).Opportunities for partnership withAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoplesAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have a long-standing experience of observing and managing Country through several climatic events.Partnering with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples could strengthen the land and agriculture sectors understanding and response to ongoing environmental changes through their practices and culture of cooperation.For example,with several Indigenous seasonal calendars based on ecological,meteorological and hydrological changes,60 their unique understanding of the local environments and the relationships within them can be integrated into modern systems to prevent the spread of harmful organisms and improve natural resource management.0.00100.00150.00200.00250.00300.00350.00400.0045455055606570758085909519901992199419961998200020022004200620082010201220142016201820202022tCO2e PER$OF OUTPUTEMISSIONS(MtCO2-e)Absolute emissionsEmission IntensityDifferent regions are likely to experience a range of challenges and opportunities due to the different impacts of climate change across Australias vast expanse of agricultural land.61 With many farms already migrating cropping activity to higher-rainfall zones to adapt,those already in favourable areas could pivot to new land uses,establish themselves and boost profitability.62 Carbon farming opportunities can reduce or offset emissions,increase food and fibre production and increase the biodiversity of ecosystems.Carbon forest sequestration could produce profitably on over 30 million hectares of land,of which there is double of the more marginal agricultural land in Australias intensive use zone.63 Integrating trees within agricultural landscapes reduces wind speed,soil surface evaporation,surface water flow speed,soil erosion and localised salinity in addition to the benefits of improving crop and stock productivity.64 Figure 5:Absolute emissions and emission intensity in the agriculture sector have been falling Notes:Figure shows estimated absolute emissions or actual emissions in MtCO2e and emission intensity in the agriculture sector in tCO2e per$of output between 1994 and 2021.Emission intensity was calculated as actual emissions divided by gross value added by the agriculture sector(chain volume measure).Definition of agriculture excludes forestry and fisheries due to what emissions in the agriculture sector consist of.Years shown on axis are fiscal years,i.e.,1994 is July 1994 to June 2021.59 13Land and waterWith growing pressure on availability of land and water resources for Australian agriculture,the sector must look to new land and water management practices to ensure long-term improvements to productivity.Currently,agriculture is the biggest land user,occupying over half of Australian land(Figure 6).65 In addition,agriculture accounts for over 70%of nationally distributed water use(Figure 7).However,pressures from population growth,urban sprawl,competing land uses and climate variability are impacting arable land availability and causing shifts in the cost of land and water.Proactive response to changes in the availability and location of arable land,exploring opportunities in new alternative industries and looking for ways to diversify and intensify production with potentially limited water supplies will need to be considered to maintain and boost productivity,resilience and sustainability.Land used for farming in Australia has declined from 65%of the countrys landmass in 1973 to 55%in 2020,with a general trend towards increased intensification.66 Property prices have seen unprecedented growth rates of 20%in 2022,largely due to consistent favourable weather conditions boosting commodity productivity and limited agriculture land on the real estate market.67 With the total number of farms gradually decreasing over the decades,the share of output among the larger farms makes up around half of Australias total agricultural output.68 In 202122,there were 54,400 broadacre and dairy farm businesses,with 62%classified as livestock farms,30%as cropping farms and 9%as dairy farms.69 As the climate shifts,these farming systems are moving further south and competing with expanding urban centres.70 Major cities have continued to see the loss of farmland to expanding urban development and other competing land uses;for example,Victoria is expected to lose another 11,000 hectares to housing developments.71 There has been a compositional shift in agricultural outputs over the past 50 years.72 Horticultural commodities,meat,oilseed and pulses now surpass the milk and wool production share,and the demand for complementary proteins is rapidly growing.73 Mixed farming has grown in some regions as farmers alternate between crops and pastures to safeguard against climate threats,divert marginal land for carbon sequestration and improve the quality of ecosystem services.Australia has previously lagged behind the rest of the world in the uptake of protected cropping,largely due to its diverse geography and natural resources for outdoor production,minimising strong drivers for change.74 With the economic impacts from climate variability affecting producers more strongly,the horticulture industry is shifting,with protected cropping becoming a rapidly growing sector showing average growth rates of 60%per year.75 65 ABARES(2023)Snapshot of Australian Agriculture 2023.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).66 ABARES(2023)Snapshot of Australian Agriculture 2023.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023);Naughtin et al.(2022)Our Future World:Global Megatrends Impacting the Way We Live Over ComingDecades.CSIRO,Brisbane,Australia.67 Jasper C(2023)High demand and tight supply drive Australian farmland values to new highs.ABC News.(accessed 5 February 2024);Rural Bank(2023)Australian farmland values.(accessed 5 February 2024).68 DAFF(2023)ABARES reports show Australian farmers adapting and adjusting to help offset climate effects.(accessed 12 December 2023).69 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).70 CSIRO(2019)Australian National Outlook.CSIRO,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).71 Hynninen(2021)Thousands of hectares of farmland being lost to residential developments in regional Victoria.ABC News.(accessed 5 February 2024);Parliament of Australia(2023)Australian food story:feeding the nation and beyond.Inquiry into food security in Australia.(accessed 5 February 2024).72 ABARES(2023)Snapshot of Australian Agriculture 2023.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).73 ABARES(2023)Snapshot of Australian Agriculture 2023.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023);Witte B,Obloj P,Koktenturk S,Morach B,Brigl M,Rogg J,Schulze U,Walker A,Von Koeller E,Dehnert N,Grosse-Holz F(2021)Food for thought:the protein transformation,Boston Consulting Group and Blue Horizon.(accessed 12 December 2023).74 Hort Innovation(2021)Australian Protected Cropping Strategy 20212030.(accessed 1 February 2024).75 Protected Cropping Australia(2020)Growing protected cropping in Australia to 2030.(accessed 1 February 2024).14 Ag2050 ScenariosReport Figure 6:Australias land use is dominated by grazingNotes:Figure shows the proportion of land in the different categories in Australia.The category Other includes defence land,stock routes,residual native cover,mining and waste areas,waste bodies and land underrehabilitation.76 76 Climateworks centre(2019)Land use futures.(accessed 20 January 2024).77 ABS(2021)Water Account:Australia 202122.(accessed 20 January 2024).78 ABS(2018)Gross value of irrigated agricultural production:201617.(accessed 12 December 2023).79 ABS(2018)Gross value of irrigated agricultural production:201617.(accessed 12 December 2023).80 CSIRO(2019)Australian National Outlook.CSIRO,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).81 CSIRO(2019)Australian National Outlook.CSIRO,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023);Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).82 NFF(2018)2030 Roadmap:Australian agricultures plan for a$100 billion industry.Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).83 Fitch et al.(2022)Australias Sequestration Potential.CSIRO.(accessed 13 March 2024).84 ABS(2018)Gross value of irrigated agricultural production:201617.(accessed 12 December 2023).85 DCCEEW(2021)Australia State of the Environment 2021:inland water.https:/soe.dcceew.gov.au/inland-water/outlook-and-impacts (accessed 30 January 2024).Figure 7:Australias water use is dominated by agricultureNotes:Figure shows the proportion of distributed water used by selected industries and households for the fiscal year 202122.Distributed water refers to water flows from one user(or supplier)to another user after extraction and excludes reuse of water,self-extracted water uses and wastewater collected.Distributed water is therefore not equal to total wateruse.77 Grazing(native vegetation)45%Conservation 23%Other 17%Grazing(modifed pastures)9%Cropland andhorticulture 4%Forestry 2%Urban 0.2%Agriculture,forestryand fshing 73%Households 18%Manufacturing 2%Mining 1%Other industries 6%Irrigated agriculture uses less than 1%of agricultural land78 and produces approximately 25%of Australias total agricultural value.However,it accounts for more than 60%of all extracted water.79 There is broad acceptance that long-term trends of extended drought periods and lower winter rainfall have affected water availability and use in the past and will continue to challenge the whole sectors water security.80 It will be important to consider the water policy management practices needed to respond to ongoing trends of climate variation as well as extreme weather conditions such as flooding that can positively impact water availability.ChallengesThe energy transition and continued urban growth will intensify land use competition in Australia.81 Infrastructure will likely need to be built on productive agricultural land to meet national renewable energy targets by 2050.82 Emission reduction efforts through carbon sequestration and agroforestry are expected to trigger significant land use shifts.Traditional approaches to land and water use will be challenged in the future to maximise arable land for valuable agricultural goods and reduce the impact on over-allocated water catchment systems while maintaining farm sustainability,productivity and profitability.83 Reduced water availability for irrigated agriculture and continued over-extraction could decrease yields in regions unable to switch to rain-fed production.84 As access to water becomes more unreliable with more varied drought and flood conditions across the country,and as the demand from different sectors grows,agriculture will be challenged with maintaining a positive water balance and achieving significant efficiency gains.85 15OpportunitiesThere is an opportunity for Australian farmers to create new revenue streams from marginal farmland.Carbon sequestration is viable on over 30 million hectares of marginal land and planting on this scale with high carbon prices could double landowner returns to as much as$114 billion per annum.86 There is also a growing base of literature on green,circular and bio-economies and the role that technological or nature-based solutions can play in tapping into those areas.87 Circular and bio-economies may represent another opportunity for farmers to diversify their revenue streams and tap into new industries such as waste utilisation and bioenergy.88 Expanding and progressing diverse mixed farming systems and protected cropping offer an opportunity for climate resilience and food security in the Australian agriculture sector.89 Mixed croplivestock systems reduce global warming potentials,lower nitrogen losses,increase soil organic carbon,increase water use efficiency and lower total production costs at the farmscale.90 86 CSIRO(2019)Australian National Outlook.CSIRO,Canberra.(accessed 12 December 2023).87 DAmato D,Droste N,Allen B,Kettunen M,Lhtinen K,Korhonen J,Leskinen P,Matthies BD,Toppinen A(2017)Green,circular,bio economy:a comparative analysis of sustainability avenues.Journal of Cleaner Production 168,716734.(accessed 13 March 2024);DAmato D,Korhonen J(2021)Integrating the green economy,circular economy and bioeconomy in a strategic sustainability framework.Ecological Economics,188,107143.(accessed 13 March 2024).88 Gomez San Juan M,Harnett S,Albinelli I(2022)Sustainable and Circular Bioeconomy in the Climate Agenda:Opportunities to Transform Agrifood Systems.FAO,Rome,Italy.(accessed 13 March 2024).89 Protected Cropping Australia(2020)Growing protected cropping in Australia to 2030.(accessed 1 February 2024).90 Baker E,Kerr R,Deryng D,Farrell A,Gurney-Smith H,Thornton P(2023)Mixed farming systems:potentials and barriers for climate change adaptation in food systems.Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 62,101270;NFF(2018)2030 Roadmap:Australian agricultures plan for a$100 billion industry.Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).91 Charles Sturt University(2019)Developing a mixed farming systems RD&A program.Meat and Livestock Australia.(accessed 20 February 2024).92 Craine R,Wells V(2021)Agriculture and the Circular Economy.CEAT,Australian National University.(accessed 6 February 2024).93 Baker et al.(2023)Mixed farming systems:potentials and barriers for climate change adaptation in food systems.Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 62,101270.94 Petrovics D,Giezen M(2021)Planning for sustainable urban food systems:an analysis of the up-scaling potential of vertical farming.Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 65(5),785-808.Althoughmixedcroplivestock systems are in place in Australia(e.g.47million hectares in southern areas and Western Australia),91 new and further diversified production systems may offer solutions to further build resilience andincrease benefits to biodiversity.These mixed systems open up many circular economy opportunities,including using livestock waste and other biological byproducts as cropping inputs or as biomass feedstocks,or turning food waste into protein for livestock feed.92 In contrast,integrated aquaponics,hydroponics or protected cropping systems with alternative feed options,biodegradable products and out-of-season produce can improve long-term climate buffering and reduce land use degradation.93 Investing in disruptive production methods decoupled from land use could address challenges in traditional agriculture.94 Thesustainable intensification of land could improve land use efficiency while minimising environmental impacts.16 Ag2050 ScenariosReport Opportunities for partnership withAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoplesAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples connection to land,sea,sky,waterways,plants,animals and cultural laws over tens of thousands of years provides the opportunity for knowledge sharing and partnership to integrate Indigenous agricultural techniques and crops into new farming systems.Greater collaboration and integration of Indigenous land and sea management practices can promote healthy soil,improve water access and quality,increase biodiversity,build resilience,expand land restoration outcomes and develop two-way learning with Indigenous partners.95As a key resource to the sector,implementing new plant breeding techniques as well as smart water governance and infrastructure advancements that enable more productive water capture and use can achieve better water use efficiency and management.For example,data analytics and in-field sensing capabilities could determine the best timing for irrigation based on crop and soil type,climate conditions,water availability and risk.96 Expanding on current initiatives,such as the National Farmers Federations target to increase water use efficiency by 20%by 2030,97 can be considered to promote water recovery projects that enhance environmental outcomes and communities.9895 Scale Climate Action(2023)Indigenous crop knowledge:sustainable adaptation for local environments.(accessed 24 January 2024).96 Petrusa J,Decker E,Tilley A,OConnor A(2021)Prospective Analysis of WaterWise:Final Case Study Report.CSIRO,Pullenvale,Australia.97 NFF(2018)2030 Roadmap:Australian agricultures plan for a$100 billion industry.Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).98 DCCEEW(2023)Off-farm Efficiency Program.(accessed 7 March 2024).17Productivity and innovationThe innovation,development and adoption of new technologies,including tools,business models and farming practices,have been key drivers for the productivity and profitability of Australian farms amid the many challenges facing the sector.Australia has globally recognised agriculture R&D capabilities and a strong R&D pipeline.99 Innovation in the agriculture sector has led to significant productivity gains over the past decades.However,the current agriculture innovation system faces several challenges in delivering the technology-driven productivity gains needed to ensure long-term profitability and competitiveness for Australian farming systems,as recognised in several reviews of the current system.100 Despite the strong pipeline of research and innovation,Australian agriculture is yet to achieve whole-sector digital maturity.101 Australian agriculture is a relatively small market and faces a growing disadvantage in commercialising and securing investment for the development and scaling of new technologies domestically.The sector faces a growing labour shortage and increasing competition for the critical skills needed to unlock technology-driven productivity.102 Consolidation and integration of farm businesses bring benefits to those businesses,103 such as buying power,step-change technologies and direct paths to major retailers via vertically integrated supply chains.Smaller and niche farms face challenges with continuing consolidation,including higher prices for agricultural land and barriers to adoption of new technologies.104 Over the past three decades,Australian agriculture has benefited from strong productivity gains driven by increases in farm scale,new and efficient practices and improved varieties and genetics.105 Emerging economies are now benefiting from these same drivers and their growth has overtaken Australias,along with agriculture sectors in other advanced economies.106 There are also signs that the pace and success of collaboration and innovation in the entirety of Australia is slowing.Although Australia ranked 7th of OECD countries on its relative number of innovation-active businesses in 2023,it ranked 24th in the Global Innovation Index,which is backwards from its 17th ranking in 2015.107 Australias broadacre productivity growth,incorporating factors such as farm innovations,research investment and investment in human capital,has declined from annual growth of 2.2tween 1978 and 2000 to an average yearly growth of 0.4tween 2000 and 2022.108 Adjusted for climate change,broadacre productivity growth has increased by 28%since 1989.109 Thisincrease has offset the negative impacts of climate change over this period and enabled at least stable productivity gains for the sector.As the impacts of continuing climate change grow,improvements to the commercialisation and adoption of R&D will be critical to maintain the profitability and global competitiveness for Australian farming systems.99 DAWE(2022)Digital Foundations for Agriculture Strategy:Driving the Development and Uptake of Digital Technologies in the Australian Agriculture,Fisheries and Forestry Industry.DAWE,Canberra,Australia.100 EY(2019)Agricultural innovation:a national approach to grow Australias future.(accessed 8 February 2024);Rural RDC(2018)Vision 2050.(accessed 8 February 2024).101 DAWE(2022)Digital Foundations for Agriculture Strategy:Driving the Development and Uptake of Digital Technologies in the Australian Agriculture,Fisheries and Forestry Industry.DAWE,Canberra,Australia.102 EY(2019)Agricultural innovation:a national approach to grow Australias future.(accessed 8 February 2024).103 Jackson T,Zammit K,Hatfield-Dodds S(2018)Snapshot of Australian Agriculture.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.agriculture.gov.au/abares/publications/insights(accessed 24 Jan 2024).104 ANZ(2017)Agtech Advance Australia Agriculture.Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited.(accessed 12 December 2023).105 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).106 Hatfield-Dodds et al.(2020)Stocktake of Megatrends Shaping Australian Agriculture:2021 Update.ABARES,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).107 Cornell University,INSEAD,WIPO(2015)The Global Innovation Index 2015:Effective Innovation Policies for Development.Fontainebleau,Ithaca,and Geneva;DISR(2023)Business innovation data.(accessed 6 March 2024).108 ABARES(2023)Australian agricultural productivity:broadacre and dairy estimates.(accessed 12 December 2023).109 Hughes N(2021)Analysis of Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation on Australian Farms.ABARES Insights,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 13 March 2024).18 Ag2050 ScenariosReport The trend towards consolidating and corporatising agriculture businesses has led to greater scale,buying power and productivity growth.The number of Australian farms has halved from over 180,000 in the early 1970s to approximately 90,000 today(Figure 8).110 Thedeclining number of farmers from 1993 to 2023(Figure9)is also indicative of farm aggregation over the years.Larger farms tend to have stronger assets and access to capital to uptake new and riskier technologies and practices compared to small businesses,leading to better productivity outcomes.111 The increase in business size is estimated to have contributed to 62%of the increase in agricultural output over the past three decades.112 Currently,the largest 10%of broadacre farms produce 50%of total output,while the smallest 50%of farms produce 10%of total output.113 Although Australian farms have enjoyed productivity gains over the past decades,they now face the challenge of a significant human capital gap in regional areas,driven by an ageing workforce and barriers to entry for new talent.As stated in the 2023 ABARES snapshot of Australias agriculture workforce,114 Australian agriculture employed 239,093 people,which is a 4.7%increase from 2016,and made up 2%of the Australian workforce.On-farm employment has fallen by 25%over the past three decades,but the workforce has steadily been growing since the early 2000s.Between the 2016 and 2021 census,the proportions of women,young people aged under35,workers aged 65 and over,and workers from cultural and linguistic backgrounds all increased.Simultaneously,alarge portion of the workforce has gradually aged(Figure 9).The low proportion of young people is largely due to several barriers to entry and retention of these workers.These include the consolidation of farms,which reduces the opportunities for entry,difficulty gaining capital and credit for young people,urbanisation leading to less investment in regional infrastructure and services,and a lack of quality modern agriculture-related education that is accessible from remote locations.115 Figure 8:The number of Australian farms is decreasingNotes:Figure shows the number of farms or agricultural businesses in Australia between the period 2005-06 to 2021-22.Missing data for the year 2005-05 and 2016-17 was calculated using the reported increase or decrease(in percentage)in the following year.Data was imputed for missing years of 2013-14 to 2014-15 by using the difference between the 2012-13 and 2015-16 data points.116110 ABS(2021-22)Agricultural Commodities,Australia.ABS Website,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 13 March 2024).111 ANZ(2017)Agtech Advance Australia Agriculture.Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited.(accessed 12 December 2023).112 ANZ(2017)Agtech Advance Australia Agriculture.Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited.(accessed 12 December 2023).113 DAFF(2023)ABARES reports show Australian farmers adapting and adjusting to help offset climate effects.(accessed 12 December 2023).114 ABARES(2023)Snapshot of Australias Agricultural Workforce.ABARES Insights,issue 3,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 12 December 2023).115 Wu W,Dawson D,Fleming-Muoz D,Schleiger E,Horton J(2019)The Future of Australias Agricultural Workforce.CSIRO Data61,Canberra,Australia.116 ABS(2021-22)Agricultural Commodities,Australia.ABS Website,Canberra,Australia.(accessed 13 March 2024).60,00075,00090,000105,000120,000135,000150,000165,000200506200910201314201718202122NUMBER OF AUSTRALIAN FARMS19ChallengesInnovation has helped develop efficient and globally competitive agriculture,forestry and fisheries industries,but changes are needed to the current approaches to agricultural R&D in Australia to deliver solutions to the complex challenges outlined in this chapter.118 Perceived or real concerns regarding the costbenefit analysis and suitability of a given technology,regulatory complexity and a reluctance of first movers to share data collectively hinder the widespread adoption of innovative agritech.119 Further,the current fo
2024-11-29
80页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-28
20页
5星级
Supported bythe World of organic agricultureSTATISTICS&EMERGING TRENDS 2024 AFRICA 2.7 MILLION HANORTH AMERICA 3.6 MILLION HAOCEANIA 53.2 MILLION HALATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN 9.5 MILLION HAASIA 8.8 MILLION HAEUROPE 18.5 MILLION HAFiBL&IFOAM ORGANICS INTERNATIONALA bouquet of first-hand expertise More than 600 publications in over 20 languages Practical recommendations,educational materials,scientific facts All publications for free downloadshop.fibl.orgAgriculture et biodiversitImpact de diffrents systmes de culture sur la diversit biologiqueFaits et chiffres2023|N 1547Manual2022|English|Nr.1300Welfare and environmental impact of organic pig production A collection of factsheetsTechnical guide2023|English Edition|No.1660Cow-reared Calf Husbandry in Dairy FarmingHousing Systems for Species-specific Rearing with Mother Cows and Nurse CowsPolicy brief2023|International Edition|No.1245African food systems are facing a number of interconnected challenges,due to the negative impacts of climate change,among other factors.Nevertheless,Africa holds a primordial position to create more resilient and sustainable food production systems.More than half of the African popula-tion base their livelihood on agriculture;and half of Africans live in urban re-gions due to a strong rural exodus over the last 50 years.There is substantial ev-idence illustrating that the dominant ag-ricultural systems feeding the growing population are not a sustainable option for the future.Global environmental and social challenges are especially pro-nounced on the African continent,and the adverse effects of climate change,bi-odiversity loss,and food and nutrition insecurity make a transition to ecologi-cal organic food systems imperative.Organic agriculture and agroeco-logical approaches are gaining impor-tance in Africa as they are supposed to enhance nutrition security and well-be-ing of both smallholder farmers and urban consumers by contributing to healthy,diversified diets.Currently,only 1%of the 204 Mio ha arable land in Africa is dedicated to certified organic farming6.A multi-tude of land is farmed in non-certified or agroecological ways.However,for African food systems to flourish and contribute to sustainable development,institutions,policies,programmes,mar-kets and society must support a condu-cive environment for change.Advancing ecological organic agriculture in Africa State of scientific evidence and recommendationsKey messages The profitability and productivity of organic farming in the tropics can equal or exceed that of conventional farms.Ecological organic agriculture requires a shift of approach to active,holistic farming.This is knowledge intensive and requires auxiliary institutions and policies.The policy landscape must strengthen to capitalise on the benefits of ecological organic agriculture and food safety.Markets must adapt to serve the distinct needs of organic farmers and consumers.Networks across levels and borders must improve.AbflammenAlternative Unkrautregulierung ohne HerbizideMerkblatt2021|Ausgabe Schweiz|Nr.1155ifoam.bioifoamorganicsThe futureis organic.Join us!Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL IFOAM Organics International The World of Organic Agriculture Statistics and Emerging Trends 2024 Edited by Helga Willer,Jan Trvnek and Bernhard Schlatter PDF version,corrigenda and supplementary material http:/www.organic- All of the statements and results contained in this book have been compiled by the authors and are to the best of their knowledge correct and have been checked by the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL and IFOAM Organics International.However,the possibility of mistakes cannot be ruled out entirely.Therefore,the editors,authors and publishers are not subject to any obligation and make no guarantees whatsoever regarding any of the statements or results in this work;neither do they accept responsibility or liability for any possible mistakes,nor for any consequences of actions taken by readers based on statements or advice contained therein.Authors are responsible for the content of their articles.Their opinions do not necessarily express the views of FiBL or IFOAM Organics International.This document has been produced with the support of the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs(SECO),the Sustainability Fund of Coop Switzerland(Coop Fonds fr Nachhaltigkeit)and NrnbergMesse.The views expressed herein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinions of SECO,Coop Switzerland or NrnbergMesse.Should corrections and updates become necessary,they will be published at www.organic-.This book is available for download at http:/www.organic- inquiries regarding this book and its contents should be sent to Helga Willer,FiBL,Ackerstrasse 113,5070 Frick,Switzerland,e-mail helga.willerfibl.org.Please quote articles from this book individually with name(s)of author(s)and title of article.The same applies to the tables:Please quote source,title of table and then the overall report.The whole report should be cited as:Willer,Helga Jan Trvnek and Bernhard Schlatter(Eds.)(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Statistics and Emerging Trends 2024.Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,and IFOAM Organics International,Bonn.Die Deutsche Bibliothek CIP Cataloguing-in-Publication-Data a catalogue record for this publication is available from Die Deutsche Bibliothek February 2024.Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL and IFOAM Organics International.Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Ackerstrasse113,5070 Frick,Switzerland,Tel. 41 62 865 72 72,e-mail info.suissefibl.org,Internet www.fibl.org IFOAM Organics International,Charles-de-Gaulle-Str.5,53113 Bonn,Germany,Tel. 49 228 926 50-10,e-mail contactifoam.bio,Internet www.ifoam.bio,Trial Court Bonn,Association Register no.8726 Cover:Kurt Riedi,FiBL,Frick,Switzerland Layout,graphs,infographics:Bernhard Schlatter,Jan Trvnek,Star Msto,Czech Republic,Helga Willer,FiBL,Frick,Switzerland Cover picture:Drought and heavy rainfall are a challenge for Naturgut Katzhof in the canton of Lucerne,Switzerland.Thats why the owners of this Demeter farm with a community garden are implementing keyline design with agroforestry.Photo:Thomas Alfldi,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland Printed by Druckerei Hachenburg PMS GmbH,Saynstrae 18,57627 Hachenburg,Germany,www.druckerei-hachenburg.de/Permalink https:/orgprints.org/52272 Table of Contents FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Glossary 10 Foreword from FiBL and IFOAM Organics International 11 Foreword from SECO 12 Foreword from BIOFACH/VIVANESS 13 Foreword from the Editors 14 Acknowledgements 15 For 25 Years:Organic Numbers from Around the World 19 Helga Willer Celebrating 25 Years of“The World of Organic Agriculture”-Testimonials 21 Organic Agriculture:Key Indicators and Top Countries 26 The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary 27 Jan Trvnek,Bernhard Schlatter and Helga Willer ORGANIC AGRICULTURE WORLDWIDE:CURRENT STATISTICS 39 Current Statistics on Organic Agriculture Worldwide:Area,Operators,Retail Sales and International Trade 40 Bernhard Schlatter,Jan Trvnek and Helga Willer 40 Organic land 42 Organic producers and other operator types 49 International Trade 53 Retail sales 56 Organic farming in developing countries and emerging markets 59 Land use and key commodities in organic agriculture 61 Wild collection and beekeeping areas,beehives,aquaculture 67 Statistics on selected crops 72 Organic Citrus Fruits 95 Salvador V.Garibay and Thomas Bernet Statistics of the Biodynamic Federation Demeter International 100 Clara Behr GLOBAL MARKET FOR ORGANIC FOOD AND DRINK 105 The Global Market for Organic Food&Drink 106 Amarjit Sahota STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS POLICY SUPPORT 111 Worldwide Overview of Regulations and Policies on Agroecological Approaches Including Organic 112 Xhona Hysa,Vladyslav Zhmailo and Te Chun Chen Participatory Guarantee Systems in 2023 121 Patricia Flores,Carolina De Jorge and Gbor Figeczky AFRICA 129 Developments in Organic Agriculture in Africa 130 David M.Amudavi,Venancia Wambua,Alex Mutungi,Chariton Namuwoza,Mgeta Daud,Olugbenga O.Adeoluwa and Francis Nsanga Table of Contents 4 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Organic Agriculture in Africa:Key Facts and Figures 142 Jan Trvnek,Bernhard Schlatter and Helga Willer ASIA 147 Developments in the Organic Sector in Asia 148 IFOAM Organics Asia Organic Agriculture in Asia:Key Facts and Figures 165 Jan Trvnek,Bernhard Schlatter,and Helga Willer EUROPE 171 Infographic Organic Agriculture in Europe 172 Organic in Europe:Recent Developments 173 Helene Schmutzler,Maria Gernert,Maria Zintl,Ohemaa Agbolosoo-Mensah,Laura Sauques,Hanna Winkler,Lea Bauer and Silvia Schmidt Europe and the European Union:Key indicators 2022 185 Organic Farming and Market Development in Europe and the European Union 186 Helga Willer,.Bernhard Schlatter,Jan Trvnek,and Diana Schaack EU imports of organic agri-food products-Key developments in 2022 212 LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN 217 Organic agriculture in Latin America 2023 218 Gabriela Soto The Inter-American Commission on Organic Agriculture Gabriela Lacaze and Juan Manuel Gmez Latin America and the Caribbean:Key Facts and Figures 222 Jan Trvnek,Bernhard Schlatter and Helga Willer NORTH AMERICA 229 Long Awaited Achievements for U.S.Organic in 2023 230 Maggie McNeil Canada 242 Tia Loftsgard Organic Agriculture in North America:Key Facts and Figures 244 Jan Trvnek,Bernhard Schlatter and Helga Willer OCEANIA 249 Key Organic Developments in Australia 250 Kane Frampton The Pacific Islands 254 Karen Mapusua Organic Agriculture in Oceania:Key Facts and Figures 257 Jan Trvnek,Bernhard Schlatter and Helga Willer OUTLOOK 263 Organics for a Prosperous Future 264 Karen Mapusua Table of Contents FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 5 ANNEX 267 Annex 1:Tables 268 1 Global data 268 1.1 Key indicators at a glance 268 1.2 Area data 271 1.3 Organic operators 281 1.4 International Trade 284 1.5 Organic Retail Sales 287 1.6 Use of organic areas:Wild collection,beehives,aquaculture and crops 288 1.6.1 Wild collection 288 1.6.2 Beehives 290 1.6.2 Aquaculture 290 1.6.4 Crops 292 1.6.4.1 Cereals 292 16.4.2 Citrus fruit 294 16.4.3 Cocoa beans 295 1.6.4.4 Coffee 296 1.6.4.5 Dry pulses 297 1.6.4.6 Fruit:Temperate Fruit 299 1.6.4.7 Fruit:Tropical and subtropical fruit 300 1.6.4.8 Grapes 302 1.6.4.9 Oilseeds 303 1.6.4.9 Olives 304 1.6.4.10 Vegetables 305 2 Tables by regions 308 2.1 Organic Agriculture in Africa:Tables 308 2.2 Organic Agriculture in Asia:Tables 313 2.3 Organic Agriculture in Europe and the European Union:Tables 317 2.4 Organic Agriculture in Latin America and the Caribbean:Tables 325 2.5 Organic Agriculture in North America:Tables 330 2.6 Organic Agriculture in Oceania:Tables 332 Annex II:Data Providers and Data Sources;About the FiBL survey 335 Data providers and data sources 335 About the FiBL Survey 351 Tables Table 1:World:Organic agricultural land(including in-conversion areas)by region:growth 2021 to 2022,and 10-year growth.42 Table 2:World:Development of the numbers of producers by region in 2022.49 Table 3:World:Organic producers,processors,importers and exporters by region in 2022.51 Table 4:World:Organic imports to the European Union and US by region 2022.53 Table 5:Global market data:Retail sales and per capita consumption by region 2022.57 Table 6:Countries on the DAC list:Development of organic agricultural land 2013-2022.60 Table 7:World:Land use in organic agriculture by 2022.61 Table 8:Use of organic arable land 2013,2021 and 2022 compared.64 Table 9:Use of organic permanent cropland 2013,2021 and 2022 compared.64 Table 10:Use of organic arable and permanent cropland 2013,2021 and 2022 compared.64 Table 11:Wild collection and beekeeping areas by region 2021 and 2022 compared.67 Table 12:Wild collection and beekeeping areas by crop group 2021 and 2022.67 Table of Contents 6 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Table 13:World:Selected key crop groups and crops area in organic agriculture 2022(overview including conversion areas).72 Table 14:Citrus exports by crop to EU and US 2022.96 Table 15:Exports of fresh organic citrus to the EU and US by country 2022.96 Table 16:Certified Demeter operations in member countries with certifying organisation(9/2022).102 Table 17:International Certification Office(ICO)-certified Demeter operations in other countries.103 Table 18:Demeter wineries 2022.104 Table 19:Organic regulations worldwide by region 2022.117 Table 20:Participatory Guarantee Systems by Worldwide 2022.127 Table 21:Europe:Organic agricultural land in Europe and the European Union 2022.189 Table 22:Europe and the European Union:Land use 2022.194 Table 23:Europe and the European Union:Key crops/crop group 2022.197 Table 24:Europe and European Union:Organic operators 2022.198 Table 25:Europe and the European Union:Organic retail sales 2022:Key data.203 Table 26:Organic shares(%)for retail sales values(euros)for selected products 2022.210 Table 27:Pacific Islands:Key crops grown.255 Table 28:Key indicators by country 2022.268 Table 29:World:Organic agricultural land by country/territory(including in-conversion areas).271 Table 30:World:Organic agricultural land(including in-conversion areas)by country/territory 2022(sorted).274 Table 31:World:Organic shares of total agricultural land by country/territory 2022(sorted).276 Table 32:World:Organic areas:Agricultural land(including conversion areas)and further organic areas by country 2022.278 Table 33:World:Organic producers and other operator types by country 2022.281 Table 34:World:Exports to the EU and USA:by crop/product 2022.284 Table 35:World:Organic imports to the European Union and US by country of origin 2022.284 Table 36:World:Organic retail sales Retail sales,organic share of all retail sales and per capita consumption by country 2022.287 Table 37:Wild collection and beekeeping areas by country 2022.288 Table 38:Number of organic beehives by country 2022.290 Table 39:Organic aquaculture:Production volume by species 2022.290 Table 40:Organic aquaculture:Production volume by country 2022.291 Table 41:Cereals:Organic area by country 2022.292 Table 42:Citrus fruit:Organic area by country 2022.294 Table 43:Cocoa:Organic area by country 2022.295 Table 44:Coffee:Organic area by country 2022.296 Table 45:Dry pulses:Organic area by country 2022.297 Table 46:Temperate fruit:Organic area by country 2022.299 Table 47:Tropical and subtropical fruit:Organic area by country 2022.300 Table 48:Grapes:Organic area by country 2022.302 Table 49:Oilseeds:Organic area by country 2022.303 Table 50:Olives:Organic area by country 2022.304 Table 51:Vegetables:Organic area by country 2022.305 Table 52:Africa:Key indicators 2022.308 Table 53:Africa:Land use in organic agriculture 2022.309 Table 54:Africa:Land use in organic agriculture 2022 by country.309 Table 55:Africa:All organic areas 2022.310 Table 56:Africa:Use of wild collection areas 2022.311 Table 57:Africa:Organic exports to the EU and US by product group 2022.311 Table 58:Asia:Organic agricultural land,organic share of total agricultural land,number of organic producers and organic exports to the EU and US 2022.313 Table 59:Asia:Land use in organic agriculture 2022.314 Table 60:Asia:Land use in organic agriculture 2022 by country.314 Table 61:Asia:All organic areas 2022.315 Table 62:Asia:Use of wild collection areas 2022.316 Table 63:Asia:Organic retail sales in 2022.316 Table of Contents FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 7 Table 64:Asia:Organic exports to the EU and US by product group 2022.317 Table 65:Europe:Organic agricultural land by country 2022.317 Table 66:Europe:Conversion status of organic agricultural land 2022.318 Table 67:Europe:Land use in organic agriculture by country 2022.320 Table 68:Europe:Organic agricultural land and wild collection areas by country 2022.321 Table 69:Europe:Organic producers,processors,and importers by country 2022.322 Table 70:Europe and European Union:Organic retail sales 2022*.323 Table 71:Europe:International Trade 2022.324 Table 72:European Union:EU organic imports by EU Member State 2018-2022(EU 27).325 Table 73:Latin America and the Caribbean:Organic agricultural land,organic share of total agricultural land,number of organic producers and organic exports to the EU and US 2022.325 Table 74:Latin America and the Caribbean:Land use in organic agriculture 2022.326 Table 75:Latin America and the Caribbean:Land use in organic agriculture 2022 by country.327 Table 76:Latin America and the Caribbean:All organic areas 2022.328 Table 77:Latin America and the Caribbean:Use of wild collection areas 2022.328 Table 78:Latin America and the Caribbean:Organic exports to the EU and US by product group 2022.329 Table 79:Northern America:Organic agricultural land,organic share of total agricultural land,number of organic producers and organic exports to the EU and US 2022.330 Table 80:Northern America:Land use in organic agriculture 2022.330 Table 81:Northern America:Land use in organic agriculture 2022 by country.331 Table 82:Northern America:All organic areas 2022.331 Table 83:Northern America:Use of wild collection areas 2022.331 Table 84:Northern America:Organic retail sales in 2022.331 Table 85:Northern America:Organic exports to the EU and US by country(totals)2022.331 Table 86:Northern America:Organic exports to the EU and US by commodity 2022.331 Table 87:Oceania:Key indicators 2022.332 Table 88:Oceania:Land use in organic agriculture 2022 by country.333 Table 89:Oceania:Organic retail sales 2022.334 Table 90:Oceania:Organic exports to the EU and US by commodity 2022(totals).334 Figures Figure 1:World:Distribution of organic agricultural land by region 2022.43 Figure 2:World:The ten countries with the largest areas of organic agricultural land 2022.43 Figure 3:World:Countries with an organic share of the total agricultural land of at least 10 percent 2022.44 Figure 4:World:Growth of the organic agricultural land and organic share 2000-2022.45 Figure 5:World:Growth of the organic agricultural land by continent 2000 to 2022.46 Figure 6:World:The ten countries with the highest increase of organic agricultural land 2022.46 Figure 7:World:Distribution of all organic areas 2022.Total:132.4 million hectares.47 Figure 8:World:Distribution of organic producers by region 2022(Total:4.5 million producers).50 Figure 9:World:Distribution of organic producers,processors,importers and exporters by region in 2022 51 Figure 10:Global market for organic food:Distribution of retail sales by country 2022.57 Figure 11:Global market for organic food:Distribution of retail sales by region 2022.57 Figure 12:Global market:The countries with the largest markets for organic food 2022.58 Figure 13:Global market:The ten countries with the highest per capita consumption 2022.58 Figure 14(left):Countries on the DAC list:The ten countries with the largest areas of organic agricultural land in 2022.60 Figure 15(right):Countries on the DAC list:The ten countries with the highest organic shares of the total agricultural land in 2022.60 Figure 16:World:Distribution of main land use types by region 2022.62 Figure 17:World:Distribution of main land use types and key crop categories 2022.62 Figure 18:World:Development of organic farmland by landuse 2004-2022.63 Figure 19:World:Distribution of organic arable cropland by region 2022.65 Figure 20:World:Use of arable cropland by crop group 2022.65 Figure 21:World:Distribution of permanent cropland by region 2022.66 Figure 22:World:Use of permanent cropland by crop group 2022.66 Figure 23:World:Distribution of organic wild collection and beekeeping areas by region in 2022.68 Table of Contents 8 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Figure 24:World:The ten countries with the largest organic wild collection and beekeeping areas in 2022.68 Figure 25:World:Distribution of organic beehives by region in 2022.69 Figure 26:World:Organic aquaculture production volume:Distribution by continent and top 10 countries 2022.70 Figure 27:World:Organic aquaculture production volume:Distribution by species and key species 2022.71 Figure 28:Cereals:Organic area 2022.73 Figure 29:Cereals:Organic area 2022.74 Figure 30:Citrus fruit:Organic area 2022.75 Figure 31:Citrus fruit:Organic area 2022.76 Figure 32:Cocoa:Organic area 2022.77 Figure 33:Cocoa:Organic area 2022.78 Figure 34:Coffee:Organic area 2022.79 Figure 35:Coffee:Organic area 2022.80 Figure 36:Dry Pulses:Organic area 2022.81 Figure 37:Dry Pulses:Organic area 2022.82 Figure 38:Temperate fruit:Organic area 2022.83 Figure 39:Temperate Fruit:Organic area 2022.84 Figure 40:Tropical and subtropical fruit:Organic area 2022.85 Figure 41:Tropical and subtropical fruit:Organic area 2022.86 Figure 42:Grapes:Organic area 2022.87 Figure 43:Grapes:Organic area 2022.88 Figure 44:Oilseeds:Organic area 2022.89 Figure 45:Oilseeds:Organic area 2022.90 Figure 46:Olives:Organic area 2022.91 Figure 47:Olives:Organic area 2022.92 Figure 48:Vegetables:Distribution of organic area by crop group 2022.93 Figure 49:Vegetables:Organic area 2022.94 Figure 50:Development of Demeter-certified farms.101 Figure 51:Development of the Demeter-certified area.102 Figure 52:Growth in Global Market for Organic Food&Drink,2012-2022.107 Figure 53:Global market:Revenue breakdown by major geographic regions,2022.108 Figure 54:Africa:The ten countries with the largest organic agricultural area 2022.144 Figure 55:Africa:The countries with the highest organic share of total agricultural land 2022.144 Figure 56:Africa:Development of organic agricultural land 2000-2022.145 Figure 57:Africa:Use of organic agricultural land 2022.145 Figure 58:Africa:Commodities exported to the EU and US(export volume in MT).146 Figure 59:Africa:Key countries exporting to the EU and US(export volume in MT).146 Figure 60:Asia:The ten countries with the largest organic agricultural area 2022.167 Figure 61:Asia:The countries with the highest organic share of total farmland 2022.167 Figure 62:Asia:Development of organic agricultural land 2000-2022.168 Figure 63:Asia:Use of organic agricultural land 2022.168 Figure 64:Asia:Key countries exporting to the EU and US(export volume in MT).169 Figure 65:Asia:Key commodity groups exported to the EU and US(export volume in MT).169 Figure 66:Europe:Organic agricultural land by country 2022.190 Figure 67:Europe:Organic shares of total agricultural land 2022.191 Figure 68:Europe and European Union:Distribution of organic farmland by country 2022.192 Figure 69:Europe and the European Union:Development of organic agricultural land 2000-2022.192 Figure 70:Europe:Growth rates for organic agricultural land in Europe and the European Union.193 Figure 71:Europe:The ten countries with the highest growth in organic agricultural land in hectares and relative growth in 2022.193 Figure 72:Europe and European Union:Distribution of land use in organic agriculture 2022.195 Figure 73:Europe:Land use in organic agriculture-top 10 countries 2022.195 Figure 74:Europe:Growth in organic agricultural land by land use type 2004-2022.196 Figure 75:European Union:Growth in organic agricultural land by land use type 2004-2022.196 Figure 76:Europe and the European Union:Development of the number of organic producers 2000-2022 199 Figure 77:Europe:Distribution of organic producers and processors by country 2022.199 Table of Contents FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 9 Figure 78:Europe:Number of organic producers by country 2022.200 Figure 79:European organic exports to the US:Top 10 European exporters.202 Figure 80:European organic exports to the US:Development 2018-2022.202 Figure 81:Europe:Retail sales by country 2022.205 Figure 82:Europe:Distribution of retail sales by country and by single market worldwide 2022.206 Figure 83:Europe:The countries with the highest shares of total retail sales 2021 and 2022.206 Figure 84:Growth of organic retail sales in Europe and the European Union,2000-2022.207 Figure 85:Europe:The countries with the highest organic market growth 2022.207 Figure 86:Europe:The countries with the highest per capita consumption 2022.208 Figure 87:Europe:Growth of the per capita consumption 2009-2022.208 Figure 88:Europe:Marketing channels for organic products in selected countries 2022.209 Figure 90:Denmark:Growth of organic food service.209 Figure 91:EU organic imports by exporting country 2021 and 2022 compared.215 Figure 92:European Union:The largest importers 2021 and 2022.215 Figure 93:EU Organic imports by product 2021 and 2022 compared.216 Figure 94:EU Organic imports:Development.216 Figure 95:Latin America and the Caribbean:The ten countries with the largest organic agricultural area 2022.226 Figure 96:Latin America and the Caribbean:Highest organic area shares 2022.226 Figure 97:Latin America and the Caribbean:Development of organic agricultural land 2000-2022.227 Figure 98:Latin America and the Caribbean:Use of organic agricultural land 2022.227 Figure 99:Latin America and the Caribbean:Key commodity groups exported to the EU and US(export volume in MT).228 Figure 100:Latin America and the Caribbean:Key countries exporting to the EU and US .228 Figure 101:United States:Development of organic retail sales 2013-2022.238 Figure 102:United States:Development of organic producers 1999-2021.240 Figure 103:North America:The ten countries with the largest organic agricultural area 2022.246 Figure 104:North America:The countries with the highest organic share of total agricultural land 2022.246 Figure 105:North America:Development of organic agricultural land 2000-2022.247 Figure 106:Northern America:Use of organic agricultural land 2022.247 Figure 107:North America:Key commodity groups exported to the EU and US(export volume in MT).248 Figure 108:Northern America:Key countries exporting to the EU and US(export volume in MT).248 Figure 109:Oceania:The ten countries with the largest organic agricultural area 2022.259 Figure 110:Oceania:The countries with the highest organic share of total agricultural land 2022.259 Figure 111:Oceania:Development of organic agricultural land 2000-2022.260 Figure 112:Oceania:Use of organic agricultural land 2022.260 Figure 113:Oceania:Key commodity groups exported to the EU and US.261 Figure 114:Oceania:Key countries exporting to the EU and US.261 Maps Map 1:Organic agricultural land in 2022.39 Map 2:Organic agricultural land in the countries of Africa 2022.129 Map 3:Organic agricultural land in the countries of Asia 2022.147 Map 4:Organic agricultural land in the countries of Europe 2022.171 Map 5:Organic agricultural land in the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean 2022.217 Map 6:Organic agricultural land in Canada and the United States 2022.229 Map 7:Organic agricultural land in the countries of Oceania 2022.249 Infographics Infographic 1:Organic agriculture worldwide-key indicators 2022.38 Infographic 2:Organic farmland 2022.41 Infographic 3:Organic producers 2022.48 Infographic 4:EU and US organic imports 2022.52 Infographic 5:Organic retail sales 2022.55 Infographic 6:Organic Agriculture in Europe 2022.172 Glossary 10 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Glossary/person:Per capita consumption in euros AfrONet:African Organic Network AMI:Agrarmarkt-Informationsgesellschaft-Agricultural Market Information Company,Germany AU/AUC:African Union/African Union Commission CAP:Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union CAADP:Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme CIAO:Comisin Interamericana de Agricultura Orgnica/Inter-American Commission for Organic Agriculture CIHEAM:Centre international de hautes tudes agronomiques mditerranennes/International Centre for Advanced Mediterranean Agronomic Studies COTA:Canada Organic Trade Association CPC:Candidates and Potential Candidates for the European Union CSC:Continental Steering Committee of the Ecological Organic Agriculture Initiative for Africa (EOA-I)EFTA:European Free Trade Association EOA:Ecological Organic Agriculture EOA-I:Ecological Organic Agriculture Initiative for Africa EU:European Union EU27:Member countries of the European Union from 2020 onward Eurostat:Statistical office of the European Union,Luxembourg FAO:Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations FAOSTAT:Statistics Division of FAO,the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations FiBL:Forschungsinstitut fr biologischen Landbau Research Institute of Organic Agriculture,Switzerland GATS:Global Agricultural Trade System of the Foreign Agricultural Service(FAS)of the United States Department of Agriculture(USDA)GIZ:Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Internationale Zusammenarbeit/German Agency for International Cooperation GOTS:Global Organic Textile Standard ha:Hectares Horizon 2020:Research and Innovation Programme of the European Union,running from 2014 to 2020 Horizon Europe:Research and Innovation Programme of the European Union,running from 2021 HS codes:Harmonized System Codes ISOFAR:International Society of Organic Agriculture Research IFOAM Organics International:Formerly International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements(IFOAM)MOAN:Mediterranean Organic Agriculture Network hosted by CIHEAM Bari,Italy MT:Metric tons NOARA:Network of Organic Agriculture Researchers in Africa OTA:Organic Trade Association,United States of America Power BI:Interactive data visualization software product developed by Microsoft for business intelligence PGS:Participatory Guarantee Systems POETcom:Pacific Organic and Ethical Trade Community SECO:State Secretariat for Economic Affairs,Switzerland SL:Stiftung kologie&Landbau Foundation Ecology&Agriculture,Germany TP Organics:European Technology Platform for Organic Food and Farming TRACES:TRAde Control and Expert System The European Commissions online platform for sanitary and phytosanitary certification required for EU imports U.S.:United States USDA:United States Department of AgricultureForeword from FiBL and IFOAM -Organics International FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 11 Foreword from FiBL and IFOAM Organics International With this edition,FiBL and IFOAM Organics International proudly present“The World of Organic Agriculture”for the 25th consecutive time.Data collection is a primary and ongoing concern for the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL and IFOAM Organics International.The extensive data provided over more than two decades in this publication serves as a vital tool for stakeholders,policymakers,authorities,the industry,as well as researchers and extension professionals.It has also proven invaluable for development programs and in supporting strategies for organic agriculture and markets,making it crucial for monitoring the impact of these activities.The publication also demonstrates our continued commitment to transparency in the organic sector;the method of data collection has evolved over time to reflect the global status of organics as accurately as possible.“The World of Organic Agriculture”has become one of the most frequently cited sources in scientific,technical,and descriptive articles and reports on organic agriculture.This publication also highlights the role of organic agriculture in overarching sustainability strategies such as the Sustainable Development Goals and the European Unions Farm to Fork Strategy.Considering that organic agriculture significantly contributes to all of these goals and strategies,this book not only presents data on land area,the number of producers,and market figures but also shows organic agricultures relevance in addressing climate change,ensuring food and nutrition security,halting biodiversity loss,and promoting sustainable consumption.Thus,it underscores its contribution to the transformation of food systems as a whole.“The World of Organic Agriculture”showcases the potential of organic farming to contribute to a sustainable future.We extend our gratitude to the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs(SECO),the Coop Sustainability Fund,and Nrnberg Messe for their support in making this publication possible.We would also like to express our appreciation to all the authors and data providers who have contributed in-depth information and figures related to their respective regions,countries,or fields of expertise.Finally,we wish to thank the editorial team for their dedication and commitment,as well as other members of the FiBL team who have supported activities related to data collection.Frick and Bonn,February 2024 Dr.Jrn Sanders Chairman of the Management Board Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL Frick,Switzerland Karen Mapusua President IFOAM Organics International Bonn,Germany Foreword from SECO 12 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Foreword from SECO In the dynamic field of organic agriculture,access to good quality data on organic farming helps to measure success toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and serves as a resource for sound analysis and informed decision-making by researchers,policymakers,industry actors and other stakeholders along the whole value chain.Data can also support the development of a favourable policy environment,reliable regulations and standards,as well as transparency in the organic sector.This report,focusing on consolidated data from 2022,reveals a significant expansion of organic farmland in many countries,with an unprecedented growth of nearly 20 million hectares.This surge has elevated global organic farmland to over 96 million hectares,representing now 2.0 percent of the worlds agricultural land and managed by more than four million producers.In 2022,organic food sales reached an impressive 135 billion euros.While growth was observed in advanced markets like Canada and the United States,several European countries experienced market stagnation or even decline.These fluctuations underscore how organic markets are influenced by global developments such as energy and inflation crises,as well as the repercussions of the conflict in Ukraine.As we await the data for 2023,we will gain insights into the continued impact of these factors on the organic market.The Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs(SECO)supports actors in the international organic industry to navigate these and other challenges and seize opportunities for the benefit of all.By facilitating dynamic and easy access to organic market and production data,we thus aim to offer a global public good in support of decision-makers in governmental administrations,the private sector,development agencies,NGOs,and the private sector.Dr.Monica Rubiolo Head of Trade Promotion Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs(SECO)Bern,Switzerland Foreword from BIOFACH/VIVANESS FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 13 Foreword from BIOFACH/VIVANESS Organic agriculture and the organic food industry provide solutions for the protection and preservation of our planet and a sustainable future for generations to come.To shape our collective future in an ecological and sustainable manner,knowledge and information are essential.For 25 years,the international patron of BIOFACH,IFOAM Organics International,and the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture,FiBL,have made an invaluable global contribution with their data publication,“The World of Organic Agriculture Statistics&Emerging Trends.”The team at BIOFACH,the worlds leading trade fair for organic food,warmly congratulates on the 25th anniversary!For everyone in the sector and the community,“The World of Organic Agriculture”is truly essential reading,offering guidance and setting the course for the future!We are delighted that IFOAM and FiBL,along with all other partners,present this comprehensive data annually at BIOFACH,the worlds leading trade fair for organic food.This includes the opening press conference,their own booth in the exhibition halls,and also during the congress.For many years,the corresponding session has been one of the most visited!My heartfelt thanks go to our partners,FiBL and IFOAM Organics International,as well as all the dedicated contributors!Danila Brunner Executive Director BIOFACH/VIVANESS Nrnberg,Germany Foreword from the Editors 14 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Foreword from the Editors In the 25th edition of“The World of Organic Agriculture,”we present the latest available data on organic agriculture.This edition marks a milestone in the history of worldwide organic agriculture data collection.To commemorate this anniversary,we invited partners to provide testimonials regarding the benefits of this statistical collection,which can be found on the following pages.A find a milestone list showcasing the history of our data collection is available on page 19).Over the past 25 years,numerous individuals have contributed valuable information and data,with some supporting us from the very beginning.We are profoundly grateful to all our authors,data and information suppliers from around the world,as well as our supporters,including the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs,the Coop Sustainability Fund,Nrnberg Messe,and IFOAM Organics International.Knowledgeable authors once again contributed articles about their regions countries or fields of expertise,covering topics such as the global market report,policy support,public standards and legislation,Participatory Guarantee Systems,and the European Unions organic import data.Please note that we have restructured the book by relocating the tables on global organic farming and organic agriculture in the continents to the end of the report.For this edition,we have further developed Power BI graphics.Most of the figures in this book are now based on Power BI,allowing for swift updates in the future.Additionally,you can explore our interactive Power BI graphics and database at https:/statistics.fibl.org.Lastly,we are delighted to announce that the 13th Chinese edition of“The World of Organic Agriculture”will be published by the Organic and Beyond Company.Helga Willer,Bernhard Schlatter and Jan Trvnek Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL Frick,Switzerland Acknowledgements FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 15 Acknowledgements Gyorgy Acs Feketene,Control Union Certifications,Zwolle,The Netherlands;Olugbenga O.AdeOluwa,Network of Organic Agriculture Research in Africa(NOARA),c/o University of Ibadan,Ibadan,Nigeria;Uygun Aksoy,Association of Ecological Agriculture Organization(ETO),Bornova Izmir,Turkey;Zahraa Al Haj Hasan,Canada Organic Trade Association,Ottawa,Canada;Khurshid Alam,Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute(BARI),Bangladesh;Abdullah Dekhel Albahi Alkhthami,Department of Organic Production,Ministry of Environment Water and Agriculture,Kingdom of Saudi Arabia;Kyle Albertyn,Ecocert South Africa,Stellenbosch,South Africa;Raed Saleh Almusaylim,Department of Organic Production,Saudi Arabia;Patricia Kristel Alvarez Ordoez,SENASA,Lima,Peru;Asan Alymkulov,BIO-KG Federation of Organic Development,Kyrgyzstan;Mirit Amrani,Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,Plan Protection and Inspection Service(PPIS),Israel;David Amudavi,Biovision Africa Trust,Nairobi,Kenya;Stoilko Apostolov,Bioselena:Foundation for organic agriculture,Karlovo,Bulgaria;Mohammad Reza Ardakani,Azad University and IFOAM-Iran,Karaj,Iran;Angel Atallah,CCPB Middle East,Beirut,Lebanon;Vugar Babayev,Ganja Agribusiness Association(GABA),Ganja City,Azerbaijan;Lisa Barsley,Textile Exchange,Exeter,United Kingdom;Violet Batcha,Organic Trade Assocition OTA,Washington,United States of America;Elif Bayraktar ktem,Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of the Republic of Turkey,Ankara,Turkey;Eva Berckmans,IFOAM Organics Europe,Brussels,Belgium;Florian Bernardi,Klaus Bchel Anstalt,Mauren,Liechtenstein;Thomas Bernet,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture(FiBL),Frick,Switzerland;Eva Berre,Ecocert International,LIsle Jourdain,France;Rommel Anbal Betancourt Herrera,Agencia de Regulacin y Control Fito y Zoosanitario-AGROCALIDAD,Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadera MAG,Quito,Ecuador;Luis Betancur Zuluaga,Federacin Orgnicos de Colombia(FEDEOrgnicos),Bogot,Colombia;Olivera Bicikliski,Ministry of Agriculture,Forestry and Water Management,Skopje,North Macedonia;Marian Blom,Bionext,Ede,The Netherlands;Barbara Bck,NrnbergMesse,Nuremberg,Germany;Urs Brndli,Bio Suisse President,Switzerland;Danila Brunner,Nrnberg Messe,Nrnberg,Germany;Marie Reine Bteich,CIHEAM Bari,Bari,Italy;Klaus Bchel,Klaus Bchel Anstalt,Mauren,Liechtenstein;Milica Bukovi,Ministry of Agriculture,Forestry and Water Management,Directorate for Agriculture,Podgorica,Montenegro;Myroslava Bzhestovska,The Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine,Kyiv,Ukraine;Juanita Caballero,Servicio Nacional de Calidad,Sanidad Vegetal y de Semillas(SENAVE),Asuncion,Paraguay;Celia Carave Blanco,Ecocert Spain,Sevilla,Spain;Claudio Crdenas,Servicio Agrcola y Ganadero(SAG),Santiago de Chile,Chile;Miguel ngel Cepeda Jimnez,Ministerio de Agricultura Republica Dominicana,Santo Domingo,Dominican Republic;Jennifer Chang,IFOAM-Organics Asia,Seoul,Republic of Korea;Te Chun Chen,IFOAM-Organics International,Bonn,Germany;Ozge Cicekli,Association of Ecological Agriculture Organization(ETO),Turkey;Thomas Cierpka,IFOAM-Organics International,Bonn,Germany;Genaro Coronel,Servicio Nacional de Calidad,Sanidad Vegetal y de Semillas(SENAVE),Asuncion,Paraguay;Eduardo Cuoco,IFOAM Organics Europe,Brussels;Nune Darbinyan,ECOGLOBE-Organic control and certification body,Yerevan,Republic of Armenia;Wahyudi David,Food Science and Technology,Universitas Bakrie,Indonesia;Yatnna De Len Rosario,Ministerio de Agricultura Republica Dominicana(MA RD),Santo Domingo,Dominican Republic;Carolina De Jorge,IFOAM-Organics International,Bonn,Germany;Sandra Delattre,OIKOPOLIS Groupe,Munsbach,Luxembourg;Zeynep Rana Demirkan lmez,Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of the Republic of Turkey,Ankara,Turkey;Rajhnael Deo,Pacific Community SPC,Fiji;Giorgia Acknowledgements 16 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn DeSantis,Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO),Rome,Italy;Tinatin Doolotkeldieva,Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University,Plant Protection Department,Bishkek city,Kyrgyzstan;Stefan Dreesmann,German Ukrainian Cooperation in Organic Agriculture,Kyiv,Ukraine;Dra Drexler,kolgiai Mezgazdasgi Kutatintzet MKi-Hungarian Research Institute of Organic Agriculture,Budapest,Hungary;Shelly Elisian,Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,Plan Protection and Inspection Service(PPIS),Israel;Lucy Ellis,Department of Agriculture,Stanley,Falkland Islands(Malvinas);Juliana Estevez,LETIS S.A.,Santa Fe,Argentina;Ditta Fekete,Control Union Certifications B.V.,Zwolle,The Netherlands;Gabor Figeczky,IFOAM-Organics International,Bonn,Germany;Tobias Fischer,KIWA-BCS ko-Garantie GmbH,Nrnberg,Germany;Dorian Flchet,Agence Bio,Montreuil-sous-Bois,France;Patricia Flores Escudero,IFOAM-Organics International,Bonn,Germany;Nicole Ford,Australian Organic Ltd,Nundah,Australia;Kane Frampton,Australian Organic Ltd,Nundah,Australia;Sergiy Galashevskyy,Organic Standard,Kyiv,Ukraine;Juan Manuel Gmez,Comisin Interamericana de Agricultura Orgnica(CIAO),Buenos Aires,Argentina;Osvaldo Garcia F.,IMOcert Latinoamerica LTDA,Cochabamba,Bolivia;Salvador Garibay,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland;Maria Gernert,IFOAM Organics Europe,Brussels,Belgium;Juan Gilardoni,LETIS S.A.,Santa Fe,Argentina.;Gunnar Gunnarsson,Vottunarstofan Tn ehf.,Reykjavik,Iceland;Heidi Haavisto-Meier,Pro Luomu-Finnish Organic Food Association,Helsinki,Finland;Zuhair Hasnain,PMAS Arid Agriculture University,Faculty of Crop and Food Sciences,Department of Agronomy,Rawalpindi,Pakistan;Jan Heusser,Coop Fonds fr Nachhaltigkeit,Basel,Switzerland;Jana Hlavkov,Institute of agricultural economics and information,Brno,Czech Republic;Brendan J.Hoare,Organic Agriculture New Zealand OANZ,Auckland,New Zealand;Elda Hodi-Isovi,Ministry of Agriculture,Water Management and Forestry,Sarajevo,Bosnia and Herzegovina;Otto Hofer,Bundesministerium fr Nachhaltigkeit und Tourismus,Wien,Austria;Lee Holdstock,Soil Association Certification Ltd,Bristol UK;Paul Holmbeck,Holmbeck Eco-Consult,Denmark;Shaikh Tanveer Hossain,IFOAM Organics Asia,Daishi Ekimae,Japan;Andrea Hrabalov,Czech Technology Platform for Organic Agriculture CTPOA,Brno,Czech Republic;Chang-Ju Huang-Tzeng,National I-Lan University NIU,Huang-Tzeng,Taiwan;Beate Huber,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland;Xhona Hysa,IFOAM-Organics International,Bonn,Germany;Marina Iluca,Ministry of Agriculture and Food Industry MAFI,Department of organic production and products with designation of origin,Chiinu,Moldova;Noshin Ilyas,PMAS Arid Agriculture University,Department of Botany,Faculty of Sciences,Rawalpindi,Pakistan;Thomas Jacob,Spices Board of India,India;Ruwi Jayasuriya,ACO Certification Ltd,Brisbane,Australia;Hakkyun Jeong,Korea Institute of Rural Social Affairs,Chungnam Province,Republic of Korea;Mariam Jorjadze,Elkana-Biological Farming Association,Akhaltsikhe,Georgia;ManChul Jung,Korea Institute for Rural Affairs and Local Governance,Chungnam Province,Republic of Korea;Oleksandr Kaliberda,German-Ukrainian Cooperation in Organic Agriculture;Nurbek Kannazarov,Organic Farming Kyrgyzstan,Kyrgyzstan;Liudmyla Khomichak,The Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine,Kyiv,Ukraine;Natalie Kleine-Herzbruch,FiBL Deutschland,Frankfurt,Germany;Barbara Kcher-Schulz,AMA-Marketing GesmbH AMA,Wien,Austria;Milana Kosanovic,Ecocert Balkan,Belgrad,Serbia;Danil Kotz,Ecocert South Africa,Stellenbosch,South Africa;Weena Krut-ngoen,ACT Certification-Organic Agriculture Certification Thailand,Nonthaburi,Thailand;Heinz Kuhlmann,ABC Enterprises,Tokyo,Japan;Maryna Kyslytska,The Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine,Kyiv,Ukraine;Graciela Lacaze,Comisin Interamericana de Agricultura Orgnica(CIAO),Buenos Aires,Argentina;Aura Lamminparras,Pro Luomu-Finnish Organic Food Association,Helsinki,Finland;Nicolas Lampkin,Organic Policy,Business and Research Consultancy;Pedro A.Acknowledgements FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 17 Landa,Organizacin Internacional Agropecuaria(OIA),Buenos Aires,Argentina;sa Lannhard berg,Jordbruksverket,Jnkping,Sweden;Jos Luis Lara de la Cruz,Servicio Nacional de Sanidad,Inocuidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria(SENASICA),Ciudad de Mexico,Mexico;Sarah Le Douarin,Agence bio,Montreuil-sous-Bois;Julia Lernoud,IFOAM Board of Dirctors,Argentina;Ida Lind,Ekologiska Lantbrukarna,Stockholm,Sweden;Aurora Josefina Lobato Garca,Subdirectora de Autorizacin y Aprobacin de Organismos de Coadyuvancia,Servicio Nacional de Sanidad,Inocuidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria(SENASICA),Secretara de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural(SADER),Ciudad de Mxico,Mexico;Tia Loftsgard,Canada Organic Trade Association,Ottawa,Canada;Pedro Lopez,PROVOTEC,Madrid,Spain;Virginija Lukien,Ekoagros,Kaunas,Lithuania;Martin Lund,Statistics Denmark,Copenhagen,Denmark;Samia Maamer Belkhiria,Ministre de lAgriculture,des Ressources Hydrauliques et de la Pche,Tunis,Tunisia;S.M.D.Madhumali,Sri Lanka Export Development Board,Colombo,Sri Lanka;Enad Mahdi,National Center for Organic Farming,Iraq;Jos Fernando Maldonado Cestona,Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadera-Direccin General de Sanidad Vegetal(MAG-DGSV),San Salvador,El Salvador;John Manhire,The AgriBusiness Group,Lincoln,New Zealand;Karen Mapusua,Pacific Community,SPC,Suva,Fiji;Roberto Maresca,Controllo e Certificazione Prodotti Biologici CCPB,Bologna;Maggie McNeil,Organic Trade Assocition OTA,Washington,United States of America;Claudia Meier,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland;Florentine Meinshausen,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland;Mikael Meland Leksen,Norwegian Agriculture Agency,Oslo,Norway;Virgnia Mendes Cipriano Lira,Ministerio de Agricultura,Pecuaria y Abastecimiento(MAPA),Brasilia,Brazil;Yenifer Mndez,MAYACERT,Colonia Mariscal Guatemala City,Guatemala;Stephen Meredith,Irish Organic Association,Athlone,County Westmeath,Ireland;Merit Mikk,Centre of Ecological Engineering-koloogiliste Tehnoloogiate Keskus,Tartu,Estonia;Jelena Milic,Ministry of Agriculture,Forestry and Water Economy,Belgrade,Republic of Serbia;Eugene Milovanov,Organic Federation of Ukraine,Kyiv,Ukraine;Rodrigo Misiac,Ecocert,Buenos Aires,Argentina;Satoko Miyoshi,Organic Congress Japan,Tokyo,Japan;Pedro Molina,SENASA,Lima,Peru;Carolin Mller,Australia;Karla Morales,Servicio Fitosanitario del Estado(SFE),San Jos,Costa Rica;Chariton Namuwoza,National Organic Agricultural Movement of Uganda NOGAMU,Kampala,Uganda;Samuel Ndungu,Kenya Organic Agriculture Movement(KOAN),Nairobi,Kenya;Dangiris Nekrasius,European Commission,DG Agriculture and Rural Development,Brussels,Belgium;Hong Ngoc,Vietnam Organic Agriculture Association VOAA,Vietnam;Gian Nicolay,Department of International Cooperation,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture,Frick,Switzerland;Urs Niggli,Agroecology.Science,Aarau,Switzerland;Ramn Ernesto Noguera Garca,Instituto de Proteccion y Sanidad Agropecuaria(IPSA),Managua,Nicaragua;Pauline Nuyts,Certisys,Bolline,Belgium;Tatsiana Ostrouh,Ecoidea project,Minsk,Belarus;Jhonny Pachaguaya Rodriguez,Servicio Nacional de Sanidad Agropecuaria e Inocuidad Alimentaria(SENASAG),Trinidad,Bolivia;Susanne Padel,Braunschweig,Germany;Amresh Kumar Pandey,Ecocert India,Aurangabad,Maharashtra,India;Vitoon Panyakul,Green Net,Bangkok,Thailand;Ejvind Pedersen,Landbrug&Fdevarer,Copenhagen,Denmark;Vinoka Perera,Sri Lanka Export Development Board,Colombo,Sri Lanka;Eliza Petrosyan-Sudzilovskaya,ECOGLOBE-Organic control and certification body,Yerevan,Republic of Armenia;James Pierce,Pacific Community SPC,Fiji;Diego Pinasco,Servicio Nacional de Sanidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria SENASA,Buenos Aires,Argentina;Mara Jos Pizarro lvarez,Oficina de Estudios y Polticas Agrarias(ODEPA),Santiago Centro,Chile;Jolita Prokofjeva,Ekoagros,Kaunas,Lithuania;Natalie Prokopchuk,Swiss-Ukrainian Program“Higher Value Added Trade from the Organic and Dairy Sector in Ukraine”(QFTP),Kyiv,Ukraine;Karol Przybylak,Redakcja BioKuriera,EKO Acknowledgements 18 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn MEDIA,Bydgoszcz,Poland;Alessandro Pulga,Bioagricert,Casalecchio di Reno,Italy;Andrii Pyvovarov,The Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine,Kyiv,Ukraine;Andrijana Rakoevi,Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,Podgorica,Crna Gora/Montenegro;Brayne Ramanantsoa,Ecocert East Africa,Antananarivo,Madagascar;Hans Ramseier,Bio Suisse,Basel,Switzerland;Pia Reindl,AMA-Marketing GesmbH AMA,Wien,Austria;Michel Reynaud,Ecocert International,Office,LIsle Jourdain,France;Kurt Riedi,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland;Lauro Antonio Rivera Gramajo,Ministerio Agricultura,Ganadera y Alimentacin(MAGA),Ciudad de Guatemala,Guatemala;Fermn Vicente Romero Houlstan,Direccin Nacional de Sanidad Vegetal;Ministerio de Desarrollo Agropecuario(MIDA),Panam,Repblica de Panam;Beth Rotha,Quality Certification Services(CS),Gainesville,Florida,US;Monica Rubiolo,Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs,Bern,Switzerland;Ayman Saad Al-Ghamdi,Organic Agriculture Department,Saudi Arabia;Amarjit Sahota,Ecovia Intelligence,London,United Kingdom;Achala Samaradiwakara,Good Market Sri Lanka,Sri Lanka;Bernadette F.San Juan,National Organic Agriculture Program of the Philippines;Jrn Sanders,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland;Mamadou Sanogo,Ecocert Burkina Faso,Ougadougou,Burkina Faso;Vernica Natali Santilln Nez,Agrocalidad,Quito,Ecuador;Myoshi Sataoko,Japan;Laura Sauques,IFOAM Organics Europe,Brussels,Belgium;Diana Schaack,Agrarmarkt Informations-Gesellschaft mbH,Bonn,Germany;Aender Schanck,Luxembourg;Marco Schlter,Naturland-Verband fr kologischen Landbau e.V.,Grfelfing,Germany;Silvia Schmidt,IFOAM Organics Europe,Brussels,Belgium;Claudine Schmit,Administration des services techniques de lagriculture(ASTA),Luxembourg;Helene Schmutzler,IFOAM Organics Europe,Brussels,Belgium;Hana ejnohov,Institute of agricultural economics and information,Brno,Czech Republic;Roberto Setti,Controllo e Certificazione Prodotti Biologic CCPB,Bologna;Elene Shatberashvili,Elkana-Biological Farming Association,Akhaltsikhe,Georgia;Kateryna Shor,Information Center“Green Dossier”,Ukraine;Laila Simaan,Ministerio de Agricultura,Pecuaria y Abastecimiento(MAPA),Brasilia,Brazil;Francesco Solfanelli,Universit Politecnica Marche,Ancona,Italy;Franziska Staubli,Bioinspecta,Frick,Switzerland;Mildred Steidle,Organic Services,Tutzing,Germany;Yoko Taniguchi,Setsunan University,Neyagawa,Japan;Ragnar rarson,Vottunarstofan Tn ehf.,Reykjavik,Iceland;Emma Tsessue,Ecocert SAS,LIsle Jourdain,France;Kesang Tshomo,National Organic Flagship Programme,Ministry of Agriculture and Forests,Thimphu,Bhutan;Daava Tungalag,Ministry of Food Agriculture and Light industry of Mongolia,Ulaanbaatar,Mongolia;Tal Weil Tzameret,Ministry of Agriculture&Rural Development,Plant Protection&Inspection Services(PPIS),Israel;Nicolette van der van der Smissen,Consultant for Organic Production,Feres,Greece;Jelena Vasiljevic,Ministry of Agriculture Serbia,Belgrade,Serbia;Airi Vetemaa,Estonian Organic Farming Foundation EOFF,Tartu,Estonia;Taras Vysotskyi,The Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine,Kyiv city,Ukraine;Hanna Winkler,IFOAM Organics Europe,Brussels,Belgium;A.K.Yadav,APEDA,August Kranti Marg,New Delhi,India;Qiao Yuhui,China Agricultural University,Beijing,China;Minou Yussefi-Menzler,Naturland-Verband fr kologischen Landbau e.V.,Grfelfing,Germany;Raffaele Zanoli,Universit Politecnica delle Marche UNIVPM,Ancona;Uli Zerger,Stiftung kologie&Landbau(SL),Bad Drkheim,Germany;Raushan Zhazykbayeva,Kazakhstan;Lisha Zheng,Ecocert China,Beijing,China;Vladyslav Zhmailo,IFOAM-Organics International,Bonn,Germany;Maria Zintl,IFOAM Organics Europe,Brussels,Belgium The World of Organic Agriculture:History FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 19 For 25 Years:Organic Numbers from Around the World HELGA WILLER1 In the year 2000,the statistical yearbook The World of Organic Agriculture was published for the first time.Since then,data have presented the data from this collaborative project at the Biofach trade fair.When the organizers of the Biofach trade fair approached the Germany-based Stiftung kologie&Landbau SL(Foundation Ecology&Agriculture)in 1999,asking if they were interested in presenting the most important statistics on organic farming annually at Biofach,we could not have imagined that we would still be presenting the latest figures in Nuremberg years later;in 2024,for the 25th time!Since the inception of data collection in 2000,the global organic area has surged by over 500 percent,reaching 96 million hectares,and the organic market has expanded nearly eightfold,from 15 billion to almost 135 billion euros by 2022.Support for data collection has also grown.In the early days,the activities were carried out Foundation Ecology&Agriculture and supported by the Biofach trade fair.Today,the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture(FiBL Switzerland)collects the data,with support from the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs,the Swiss Coop Sustainability Fund,IFOAM-Organics International,and NrnbergMesse as the organizer of Biofach.The data collection is also made possible by numerous partners from around the world,some of whom have been providing data for 25 years.Since 1999,data collection has been continuously expanded and has now become the most important reference work for the development of organic farming.For example,the European Commission uses the data to demonstrate that European consumers value organic products highly.Researchers regularly cite the data in their work.In 2015,FiBL added the survey on the status of voluntary sustainability standards such as Fairtrade or Rainforest Alliance.The results are also published annually on https:/vss.fibl.org.Data sources:The majority of data collection is done through personal contacts,and many data can also be obtained via the internet.For example,Eurostat,the statistical office of the European Union,provides data on land area,livestock,production,and farms on its website.For countries that do not publicly provide their data,FiBL sends out questionnaires.If there is no national agency collecting data,FiBL collects the data among international certifiers and compiles it for the respective country.Often,land and production data come from different sources than market,export,and import data.For example,in the USA,data on organically managed land,production,and livestock come from the statistics office of the US Department of Agriculture,while retail trade data is provided by the Organic Trade Association(OTA).Import and export data,on 1 Dr.Helga Willer,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland The World of Organic Agriculture:History 20 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn the other hand,come from the Foreign Agricultural Service of the Department of Agriculture.Overall,FiBL collaborates with at least 200 different data sources and suppliers.Data processing and access:In addition to the demanding quality assurance process,a significant challenge is handling the constantly increasing volume of data.Improved access to data through digital tools is another challenge.FiBL provides interactive databases and infographics on its website https:/statistics.fibl.org,which require continuous development.Efforts are underway to incorporate additional indicators,enhance user-friendliness,and automate production data estimation.Data publication:The primary medium for disseminating the data is the statistical yearbook The World of Organic Agriculture,published jointly by FiBL and IFOAM Organics International and presented annually at Biofach.In this publication,in addition to detailed tables and graphics,reports on the development of organic farming in the continents and topics such as the market and legislation can be found.In addition to the book,the data is also available interactively online.The offering is complemented by popular infographics,which,like other materials,can be accessed via www.organic-.Milestones 1999:The then organizers of Biofach,Hagen Sunder and Hubert Rottner,asked the Foundation Ecology&Agriculture SL to regularly present global organic farming figures at Biofach.2000:The first edition of the statistical book and the data were presented at Biofach.At that time,they were limited to indicators such as area and farms.Later editions added land use(2006),retail sales(2012),and imports and exports(2020).2001:The Research Institute of Organic Agriculture(FiBL)becomes a partner.2008:Funded by the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs of Switzerland(SECO)and the International Trade Centre(ITC),FiBL was able to establish a professional database.This allowed for better collection,storage,processing,and analysis of data.FiBL also launched the website organic-.2011:The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO)integrated FiBLs data on land use in organic farming into their FAOSTAT online database.2012:The EU-funded project OrganicDataNetwork began.Within its framework,data collection and processing methods were improved,and an interactive online database was established.The trading company Organic and Beyond first published the Chinese translation of The World of Organic Agriculture,which has since been regularly released.2014:The successor project to the SECO-ITC-funded project Global Information System for Organic Market and Production Data includes data collection on voluntary sustainability standards.2015:The first edition of The State of Sustainable Markets with data on 14 voluntary sustainability standards was published by FiBL,ITC,and the International Institute of Sustainable Development(IISD).The Twitter account FiBLStatistics was created and has been used for publicizing the yearbook since then.2018:FiBL launched the interactive online database statistics.FiBL.org and presented infographics on global organic farming for the first time.2019:The 20th edition was co-financed for the first time by the Coop Sustainability Fund.2020:Data was made available for the first time with interactive infographics using the PowerBI program online at statistics.fibl.org.Most of the graphics in the yearbook are now created with PowerBI.2023:The Statistical Handbook Organic Agriculture in Africa,which provides in-depth African data,was published.2024:Presentation of the 25th edition of The World of Organic Agriculture is presented at Biofach.Testimonials FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 21 Celebrating 25 Years of“The World of Organic Agriculture”-Testimonials In this special 25th edition of The World of Organic Agriculture,we are commemorating a milestone achievement.To express our deep appreciation for their invaluable support,we have reached out to our esteemed contacts and data providers,inviting them to share testimonials that underscore the profound significance of this yearbook in their professional endeavors.We are sincerely grateful for their contributions,which have played an integral role in shaping the impact and relevance of our publication over the years.I would like to take this opportunity to express my deep appreciation for the work done on organic statistics.The World of Organic Agriculture is one of FiBLs most significant flagship projects,and I take great pride in it.Dr.Jrn Sanders,Chairman of the FiBL Management Board The statistics book measures the pulse of the organic sector and it is a key reference point for us when it comes to showcasing the impact and constant development of organic agriculture worldwide.We use the information collected to provide our members reliable data and support our role in convening inclusive conversations at a global scale,it is an invaluable resource.Karen Mapusua,President IFOAM Organics International 25 years-thats really a great date and its amazing!For me the global data collection is essential as it provides a lot of insights,allows me to follow trends and stay connected to the farmers.It also empowers to make informed decisions that can drive organic farming and inspire positive changes.Tatsiana Astraukh,Ecoidea,Belarus The Organic Trade Association is honored to have contributed to the World of Organic Agriculture for 25 years.Having access to sound data is critical to the growth and sustainability of the organic sector.Accurate data helps policymakers develop sound national organic strategies.Growers and producers of organic products,as well as processors,retailers,and the entire organic supply chain,need precise data to make practical production and business decisions.International data sharing benefits the entire organic sector,as well as organic consumers.Violet Batcha,Director of Marketing&Communications,Organic Trade Association,USA A sector must know how to analyze,visualize,and represent itself in order to be significant.What would the world of organic farming be like without the data collected,processed,and disseminated under the direction and expertise of FiBL,without the informational network and international relationships of IFOAM Organics International,without the global fair BIOFACH where they are presented every year and which inspired the first collection in 1999?Organic Agriculture Worldwide:Key Indicators 22 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Thanks to them,global organic data is accessible to everyone through The World of Organic Agriculture yearbook and dynamic statistics on the organic- website.An invaluable asset.Rosa Maria Bertino,Bio Bank,Italy The annual surveys make the global development of organic farming tangible and serve as an important reference.They highlight the significance of organic production worldwide and enable the correct assessment of the national status of development in the organic sector Urs Brndli,President Bio Suisse,Switzerland For 25 years now,the international patron of BIOFACH,IFOAM Organics International,and the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture,FiBL,have been making an invaluable contribution to ecological and sustainable future shaping with“The World of Organic Agriculture”!For everyone in the sector and the community,this(data)publication is a true“must-read”it provides well-founded facts and analyses,offering guidance and setting the course for the future!Danila Brunner,Executive Director BIOFACH/VIVANESS,Germany The publication has become the most important reference for the development of organic farming.The data,statistics,and trends are interesting and very meaningful.I have been using the data from World of Organics for over 15 years as a valuable basis for decision-making.For market development,the data,trends,and forecasts for the demand for organic products help me create and assess where action is needed.For agricultural policy studies,I use the data to assess specific developments.Especially in the development of organic farming,it has been and still is important to be able to classify changes in certain regions in relation to other regions or to the whole.For the future,I hope that data collection will be continued.Furthermore,I would be pleased if the data quality is further improved,and the scope of information is expanded,especially concerning the markets.Klaus Bchel,Klaus Bchel Anstalt,Liechtenstein One of the standout highlights at Biofach is the annual release of the global organic farming statistical yearbook,a collaborative effort between FiBL and IFOAM.This comprehensive publication offers valuable insights into the current status of organic agriculture worldwide,in Europe,and at the national level,utilizing the latest available data.Dr.Dra Drexler,Hungarian Institute of Organic Agriculture MKi Hungary The Interamerican Commission on Organic Agriculture(CIAO)highly values the joint work with FiBL,we hope to continue contributing to the quality of the information to have increasingly accurate statistics.Juan Manuel Gmez,Inter-American Commission for Organic Agriculture CIAO,Argentina The FiBL statistics serve as an invaluable tool for examining organic markets and narrating the evolution of organic production.With their visually appealing,concise,and informative presentation,these statistics are a vital resource for both policy makers and market analysts.Testimonials FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 23 They provide a robust and readily accessible foundation upon which to make informed decisions.The FiBL statistics have been a true blessing for the organic movement,playing a pivotal role in the ongoing advancement of the organic sector.My profound gratitude extends to all those dedicated individuals who diligently undertake the often challenging and underappreciated work of gathering,verifying,and presenting these figures.Dr.Benedikt Haug,Lecturer at Wageningen University and freelance organic market developer,The Netherlands Having the most up-to-date organic data is essential,as it provides valuable insights for program and business design by offering a clear understanding of trends.However,in many Asian countries,there are no dedicated agencies responsible for collecting such data,necessitating the need to explore alternative methods Dr.Shaikh Tanveer Hossain,Director,Policy&Strategy,IFOAM-Organics Asia The Interamerican Commission on Organic Agriculture(CIAO)countries consider FiBLs work as the sole global reference for collecting,systematizing,analyzing,and publishing standardized global organic production data.They highly value this information as a fundamental resource for their work within each country and express high satisfaction in contributing to FiBLs annual data collection Gabriela Lacaze,Inter-American Commission for Organic Agriculture CIAO,Argentina The work that Helga Willer and her team are doing on this annual publication and data collection is really important.It is extremely critical for the development of organic farming and production that we have up-to-date data and information available.Aura Lamminparras,Executive Director,Finnish Organic Food Association Pro Luomu This invaluable publication provides a comprehensive overview of regional trade data that is essential for our industry.It enables us to establish a global ranking of leaders in production and sales,which is a vital resource in our discussions with government officials.Despite our sectors relatively small size compared to non-organic counterparts,our global ranking piques their interest and helps us advocate for continued support for organic initiatives Tia Loftsgard,Executive Director,Canada Organic Trade Association In the era of big data analytics and data-driven decision-making,data collection plays a crucial role.Data in organic agriculture not only enhance transparency but also contribute significantly to bolstering consumer confidence in organic products and the certification process itself.This underscores the meaningful and important work carried out by all certification bodies.Virginija Lukien,Ekoagros,Lithuania Great to see the World of Organic marking its 25th edition.It continues to remain a go-to reference tool for people monitoring organic production and market trends worldwide.Organic Agriculture Worldwide:Key Indicators 24 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn This reflects the important work undertaken by Helga Willer,the team at FiBL and all the various partners over the years.Stephen Meredith,Head of Policy,Irish Organic Association,Ireland The initial concept aimed to materialize an emerging idea in agriculture and nutrition.Metrics related to farmers,land areas,and turnover were a fitting choice for this purpose.Helga Willer emerged as the perfect figure to breathe life into this initially dry undertaking.What began as a publication of less than 20 pages eventually expanded to 360 pages per issue.The network of data providers from various countries,along with Helgas team at FiBL,continued to grow.It was through rigorous quality control that the information attained its current value,enabling policymakers and businesses to base their decisions upon it.Over time,it has evolved into the global yearbook of a highly promising industry.Prof.Dr.Urs Niggli,President of the Institute of Agroecology and Former Director of the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Switzerland The data provided by FiBL and IFOAM for the global organic movement is highly appreciated.Vitoon Panyakul,Green Net,Thailand Congratulations to the team behind the book The World of Organic Agriculture and the organizations that have made this publication possible for 25 years!This book has grown to be the most vital and dependable source of information for producers,researchers,policymakers,consumers,NGOs,media,and diverse stakeholders around the world.It stands as the most systematic repository of global organic statistics and history.It is imperative to continue releasing The World of Organic Agriculture in the future.Natalie Prokopchuk,Swiss-Ukrainian Program“Higher Value Added Trade from the Organic and Dairy Sector in Ukraine”,Kyiv,Ukraine The World of Organic Agriculture is like the bible of the organic food industry.Produced annually,it is the most comprehensive report on organic farming,production,and markets worldwide.I am proud to contribute each year to this important publication!Amarjit Sahota,Director of Ecovia Intelligence,London,UK For 25 years,this publication has stood as a unique and invaluable resource,providing a comprehensive global overview of the development of organic farming.Its depth and breadth render it an indispensable tool for comprehending and influencing the future of sustainable,organic agriculture.Personally,I extend my deep appreciation to Helga Willer for her commitment to collecting all the data and to the hundreds of individuals who have generously contributed essential data throughout the years.Jan Trvnek,Czech Organics,Czechia,FiBL Organic Statistics Team The significance of having access to dependable data concerning organic agriculture from all countries in one central source,specifically within the publication“The World of Organic Agriculture”,is self-evident.This holds particular importance for Ukraine,which is committed to securing its place on the global organic map,solidifying its leading role as a supplier of Testimonials FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 25 organic products to international markets,and nurturing the growth of its domestic organic sector.The collection and analysis of reliable information constitute an essential component of the decision-making process,both at the national level and for individual producers.The ongoing efforts of the FiBL and IFOAM initiative have played a pivotal role in constructing a comprehensive overview of the current state of organic agriculture worldwide,enabling the monitoring of trends in the global organic sector.“The World of Organic Agriculture”serves as an invaluable resource for the Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine and for Ukrainian organic producers.It facilitates discussions on international experiences and collaborative endeavors aimed at enhancing the competitiveness of Ukrainian organic products in the global marketplace.Ukraine has consistently contributed information about its organic agriculture to this publication over the years,and we,at the Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine,are delighted to be partners in providing this essential data about Ukraine.We extend our best wishes for the teams continued success in this important undertaking.May organic agriculture flourish worldwide!Taras Vysotskyi,First Deputy Minister of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine According to“The World of Organic Agriculture-Statistics and Emerging Trends”,China ranks fourth globally in both the organic market and organic agricultural area.Understanding our global position and realizing our potential for organic development by referencing developed countries in the organic sector is of significant importance to us.Prof.Dr.Qiao Yuhui,China Agricultural University,Beijing,China The statistical data provided in the annual FiBL-IFOAM publication have been instrumental in comprehending the current state of the organic sector in Kazakhstan and other countries within the Eurasian Economic Union(EAEU),where data collection remains challenging.Often,the FiBL-IFOAM statistics serve as the sole reliable source,not only for researchers but also for government authorities,organic producer organizations,and other stakeholders in the region.The absence of data on organic production,exports,imports,domestic consumption,allowable inputs,and other vital information creates a bottleneck and hinders countries ability to accurately assess the sectors development requirements and formulate policies to support producers and trade.The work of FiBL and IFOAM can offer valuable insights for the development of effective national data collection systems.Raushan Zhazykbayeva,International legal expert,Kazakhstan Organic Agriculture Worldwide:Key Indicators 26 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Organic Agriculture:Key Indicators and Top Countries Indicator World Top countries Countries with organic activities1 2022:188 countries Organic agricultural land 2022:96.4 million hectares (2000:15 million hectares)Australia(53.0 million hectares)India(4.7 million hectares)Argentina(4.1 million hectares)Organic share of total agricultural land 2022:2.0%Liechtenstein(43.0%)Austria(27.5%)Estonia(23.4%)Increase of organic agricultural land 2021/2022 20.3 million hectares(ha); 26.6%Australia:17328259 ha( 48.6%),India:2068825 ha( 77.8%)Greece:390223 ha( 73.0%)Wild collection and further non-agricultural areas 2022:34.6 million hectares(ha)(1999:4.1 million hectares)Finland(6.9 million hectares)India(4.4 million hectares)Zambia(3.2 million hectares)Producers 2022:4.5 million producers (1999:200000 producers)India(2480859)Uganda(404246)Thailand(121540)Organic market2 2022:134.8 billion euros(2000:15.1 billion euros)US(58.6 billion euros)Germany(15.3 billion euros)China(12.4 billion euros)Per capita consumption 2022:17.0 euros Switzerland(437 euros)Denmark(365 euros)Austria(274 euros)Number of countries/territories with organic regulations 75(fully implemented)14(drafting)Number of affiliates of IFOAM Organics International 2022:781 affiliates Germany:80 affiliates China:52 affiliates India:49 affiliates USA:45 affiliates Source:FiBL survey 2024,based on national data sources,data from certifiers and IFOAM Organics International 1 Where the designation country appears in this book,it covers countries and territories,see UNSTAT website https:/unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/2 Please note that there are some differences in organic food sales figures from Ecovia Intelligence and those from FiBL due to different methodologies.According to Ecovia Intelligence,global retail sales reached 127.5 billion euros in 2022(see article by Sahota in this volume).One euro corresponded to 1.0530 US dollars in 2022 according to the European Central Bank.The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 27 The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary JAN TRVNEK1,BERNHARD SCHLATTER,2 AND HELGA WILLER3 The latest global organic agriculture data for 2022 from 188 countries paint an exceptional picture.In an unprecedented surge,organic farmland expanded to over 96 million hectares(mainly due to growth in Australia),and the number of farmers grew strongly,increasing by more than 20 percent to 4.5 million producers.The sales of organic products in the retail sector reached nearly 135 billion euros,despite experiencing slower growth and encountering stagnation and declines in certain European countries.Statistics on organic area Nearly 96.4 million hectares of organic farmland In 2022,nearly 96.4 million hectares of agricultural land were organic(including in-conversion areas).The regions with the largest organic agricultural land areas were Oceania(53.2 million hectares comprising more than half of the worlds organic agricultural land,at 55 percent)and Europe(18.5 million hectares,accounting for 19 percent).Latin America followed with 9.5 million hectares(10 percent),succeeded by Asia with 8.8 million hectares(9.2 percent),Northern America with 3.6 million hectares(3.8 percent),and Africa with 2.7 million hectares(2.8 percent).For details on organic areas,see chapters from page 42).Australia has the largest area The countries with the most organic agricultural land were Australia(53.0 million hectares),India(4.7 million hectares)and Argentina(4.1 million hectares).Globally,2.0 percent of the farmland is organic In 2022,2.0 percent of the worlds agricultural land was organic.The highest organic shares of the total agricultural land,by region,were in Oceania(14.3 percent)and in Europe(3.7 percent;European Union:10.4 percent).Liechtenstein had the highest organic share,with 43.0 percent Some countries achieve significantly higher organic shares compared to the global average.Liechtenstein(43.0 percent),Austria(27.5 percent),and Estonia(23.4 percent)had the highest organic shares.Remarkably,in 22 countries,10 percent or more of their agricultural land was organic,setting a new record.1 Jan Trvnek,Czech Organics,Star Msto,Czech Republic, 2 Bernhard Schlatter,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland,www.fibl.org 3 Dr.Helga Willer,Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL,Frick,Switzerland,www.fibl.org The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary 28 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Unprecedented growth in organic farmland Increase of 20.3 million hectares Organic farmland witnessed a substantial expansion of 20.3 million hectares(26.6 percent)in 2022,with numerous countries reporting significant growth.The largest increases in absolute terms were observed in Australia,India,and Greece.Australias organic farmland surged by more than 17328259 hectares( 49 percent),while India experienced a growth of nearly 2068825 hectares( 78 percent),and Greece saw an increase of almost 390223 hectares( 73 percent).Nevertheless,some countries experienced a decrease in organic farmland,with the most significant decline occurring in the Russian Federation,where data showed a reduction of nearly 0.5 million hectares.Increase of organic farmland in all continents In 2022,organic agricultural land increased on all continents.The highest absolute growth was in Oceania( 47.8 percent, 17.2 million hectares),followed by Asia( 35.9 percent, 0.39 million hectares),North America( 10.7 percent, 0.35 million hectares),Africa( 4.9 percent, 0.1 million hectares),Europe( 1 percent, 0.2 million hectares),and Latin America( 0.6 percent, 52996 hectares).Growth in most major crop groups Land use and crop details were available for over 92 percent of the organic agricultural land.However,some countries with very large organic areas,such as Brazil and India,had limited or no information on their land use(see chapter from page 61).Grassland/grazing areas constituted more than two-thirds of the organic agricultural land,accounting for over 67.6 million hectares and experiencing a 25.5 percent increase in 2022.Arable land,covering almost 15.1 million hectares,made up 15.6 percent of the organic agricultural land.Although this category reported a 0.7 percent decrease since 2021,it was primarily utilized for cereals,including rice,along with green fodder from arable land,oilseeds,textile crops,and dry pulses.Permanent crops occupied 6.6 percent of the organic agricultural land,totalling over 6.2 million hectares.Compared to the previous survey,a modest increase of more than 48000 hectares or 0.8 percent was reported.The most significant crops in this category included nuts,olives,coffee,grapes,and cocoa(see chapter on land use in organic agriculture from page 61).Organic citrus The contribution on organic citrus fruits by Garibay and Bernet(page 95)discusses the growth and challenges in organic citrus production.From 2004 to 2022,global organic citrus acreage increased by over 86000 hectares but experienced a 3.3cline in 2022.Europe leads in production,with Italy and Spain being the top producers,followed by contributions from Latin America and Africa.This decline is partly attributed to citrus greening disease,while further challenges include lower yields,nutrition and resilience concerns,and pest and disease management.Key exports to the EU and US include lemons,limes,and oranges,with South Africa,Mexico and Colombia as major exporters.The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 29 Further organic areas Apart from land dedicated to organic agriculture,there are further areas of organic land dedicated to other activities.The largest parts of these are wild collection areas and beekeeping areas.Further non-agricultural areas include aquaculture,forests and grazing areas on non-agricultural land.These areas totalled 34.6 million hectares,and all the organic areas together summed up to 132.4 million hectares(see chapter from page 67).Organic producers on the rise 4.5 million producers in 20221 In 2022,the global count of organic producers surged to a staggering 4.5 million.Asia led the way with a commanding 61 percent of the worlds organic producers,closely trailed by Africa at 22 percent,Europe at 11 percent,and Latin America at 6 percent.The top three countries with the highest number of organic producers were India(2480859),Uganda(404246),and Thailand(121540).Notably,there was a remarkable increase in the number of producers,with a dramatic rise of nearly 919000 or an astonishing 25.6 percent growth compared to 2021.For more information on organic operators,see page 49.Increase in exports to the USA,decline in exports to the EU In 2022,the EU and USA collectively imported nearly 4.9 million metric tonnes of organic products,marking a 4.2 percent increase of approximately 197000 metric tonnes.While total exports to the EU decreased by 146173 MT(-5.1 percent),exports to the USA increased by 342867 MT( 18.8 percent).Ecuador emerged as the leading exporter,followed by Mexico and Peru.Significant export growth was observed in Mexico,Togo,and China,while notable declines were seen in imports from India,the United Kingdom,and Chile.The top three imported organic products were bananas,soybeans,and sugar,accounting for 46 percent of total imports.The US,the Netherlands,and Germany served as the primary importers,comprising nearly 74 percent of all organic imports(please note that the import volumes to the US are not complete).For more information,see page 53.1 Please note that some countries report only the numbers of companies,projects,or grower groups,which may each comprise a number of individual producers.It may be assumed that the total number of organic producers is higher than that reported here.The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary 30 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Global market reached nearly 135 billion euros Organic food and drink sales reached nearly 135 billion euros1 2,according to FiBL(page 56)3 4 in 2022.In 2022,the countries with the largest organic markets were the United States(58.6 billion euros),Germany(15.3 billion euros)and China(12.4 billion euros).The largest single market was the United States(43 percent of the global market),followed by the European Union(45.1 billion euros,34 percent)and China(12.4 billion euros,9.2 percent).Switzerland had the highest per-capita consumption in 2022,with 437 euros.The highest organic market shares were reached in Denmark(12.0 percent),Austria(11.5 percent)and Switzerland(11.2 percent).Several markets experienced a decline,and in Europe,organic retails sales decreased by more than two percent.In North America,however,the market increased.For more information,see page 56.According to Sahota(page 106),the major challenges facing the global organic food market include rising food prices due to inflation,geopolitical factors disrupting supply chains,the impact of the Ukrainian conflict on the economy,and concerns about oversupply in the wake of increased demand during the pandemic.Consumer demand for organic products varies,driven by health reasons,ethical considerations,and environmental concerns.However,competition from products like plant-based foods and GMO-free items makes it challenging to differentiate organic foods in the market.In conclusion,while global organic food sales stabilized after a surge in 2020,challenges such as inflation and supply disruptions have affected consumer demand.Growth is expected to resume as economic conditions improve.Statistics of the Biodynamic Federation Demeter International The Biodynamic Federation Demeter International is an umbrella organization comprising 48 member organizations committed to biodynamic agriculture.This movement is set to mark its centenary in 2024.Collectively,the network of the Biodynamic Federation Demeter International encompasses more than 7000 Demeter farms,spread across a vast expanse of over 255000 hectares in 62 countries.More details are available from the contribution by Behr(page 100).Regulations and policies Organic regulations Regarding regulations,according to the latest data collected by IFOAM-Organics International,in 2022,75 countries had fully implemented regulations on organic agriculture.Twenty-one countries had organic regulations that were not fully 1 Please note that there are some differences in organic food sales figures from Ecovia Intelligence and those from FiBL due to different methodologies.According to Ecovia Intelligence,global retail sales reached over 127.7 billion EUR in 2022.2 In 2022,1.0530 US dollars corresponded to 1 euro.3 Please note that there are some differences in organic food sales figures from Ecovia Intelligence and those from FiBL due to different methodologies.According to Ecovia Intelligence,global retail sales reached over 127.7 billion EUR in 2022.4 In 2022,1.0530 US dollars corresponded to 1 euro.The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 31 implemented,and 14 were drafting legislation.The guidance for growers groups under the new EU Organic Regulation 2018/848 introduces significant changes impacting millions of organic farmers globally.IFOAM-Organics International has provided guidance to assess these changes.The Pacific Organic Standard Guidebook enhances consistency,and Australias decision against domestic organic regulation led to the formation of the Organic Development Group.Meanwhile,New Zealands Organic Products and Production Act supports sector growth and exports.Lastly,the Memorandum of Understanding between Canada and Mexico promotes equivalence of organic products,facilitating trade and cooperation.(See by Hysa et al.on page 112).Policies for organic farming A growing number of governments across the globe are actively championing agroecological policies,demonstrating their commitment through the introduction of new initiatives and programs characterized by clear,predefined objectives.Countries like Tanzania,Vietnam,Cambodia,Japan,and Taiwan are notable examples of this trend.Simultaneously,on a regional scale,there is a discernible surge in the adoption of agroecological policies,driven by the formulation of strategic initiatives.Noteworthy instances include the collective efforts of ASEAN countries and the proactive measures taken by members of the African Union.For more information,see article by Hysa et al.on page 112.Participatory Guarantee Systems in 2022 IFOAM-Organics International is the sole organization collecting global data on PGS.In total,the global PGS landscape encompasses 64740 initiatives and 188709 certified producers,impacting the lives of 1823525 individuals.The certified land area at the global level spans an impressive 1131933 hectares,emphasizing the collaborative effort across continents to promote and adopt PGS in agriculture(see article from Flores et al.on page 121).Organic in the regions Africa In 2022,Africa boasted more than 2.7 million hectares of certified organic agricultural land,representing a remarkable 4.9 percent increase of nearly 128000 hectares compared to 2021.The continent also reported over 975000 producers involved in organic farming.Uganda stood out as the country with the largest organic area,exceeding 505000 hectares in 2022,and also claiming the highest number of organic producers,with over 404000.Notably,the island state of So Tom and Prncipe dedicated 21.1 percent of its agricultural land to organic crops,showcasing the regions commitment to organic farming.Most certified organic products from Africa are destined for export markets,with key crops including cocoa,cotton,coffee,oilseeds,nuts,and olives.For more information about statistics in Africa,see page 165.Furthermore,five African countries have existing legislation on organic agriculture,while an additional five are in the process of drafting such legislation(see article by Hysa et al.on page 112).The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary 32 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn Ecological Organic Agriculture(EOA)in Africa has continued to receive attention from various stakeholders,including farmers,practitioners,researchers,policymakers,and others,particularly in the wake of shocks caused by the COVID-19 pandemic,the war in Ukraine,conflicts in the Middle East,and other environmental crises.Various studies conducted on organic and conventional systems have demonstrated the potential of EOA to contribute to food security and nutrition,restore land degradation,alleviate poverty,mitigate climate change,and enhance resilience,among other socioeconomic and environmental benefits.Some of these aspects were central to the 1st Eastern Africa Agroecology Conference(EAAC)held in March 2023.Presentations at the conference highlighted the growth of EOA,the momentum it has gained,and the progress in organic policy adoption in countries such as Uganda and Tanzania.For more updates about Africa,see the contribution by Amudavi et al.,page 130.Asia In 2022,Asia had over 8.8 million hectares of agricultural land managed by 2.7 million producers.The majority of these producers were in India,where their numbers increased by one million from 2021 to 2022,significantly contributing to the global growth of organic farmers.India,with 4.73 million hectares,and China,with over 2.90 million hectares,emerged as the leading countries in terms of organic agricultural land.Notably,Timor-Leste stood out with the highest proportion of organic agricultural land at 8.5 percent.For more information about Asian statistics,see page 165).The region demonstrated a strong commitment to organic practices,with twenty-two countries having legislation in place for organic agriculture,while seven countries were in the process of drafting relevant legislation(see article by Hysa et al.on page 112 for further details).In 2023,Asias organic sector saw notable developments,including comprehensive support plans by various governments like Japans Sustainable Food Systems Strategy,Kyrgyzstans focus on organic agriculture in its Five Years of Action for the Development of Mountain Regions,and Saudi Arabias integrated support system.The 6th Organic Asia Congress emphasized peace and food security,and new networks,such as the Young Elected Officers Network and Education and Research Network for Organic Agriculture Development(E-ROAD),were established.The 1st International Conference on Organic Agriculture in Drylands and Deserts led to the formation of the Drylands and Deserts Organic Agriculture Network(DOAN).The 2nd World Organic Youth Summit discussed youth opportunities in the organic sector.In 2024,IFOAM-Organics Asia plans to introduce a global organic award,co-organize an international conference on school meals and public procurement,and host the World PGS Conference coinciding with the 20th anniversary of the IFOAM PGS launch.Additionally,IFOAM Asia will collaborate with members on pre-conferences and side events for the 21st IFOAM Organic World Congress in Taiwan,highlighting the growing importance of organic agriculture in Asia and efforts to promote regulation,certification,and market expansion.More information is available in the chapter of IFOAM Organic Asia on page 148.The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn 33 Europe By the end of 2022,in Europe more than 18.5 million hectares of organic agricultural land(European Union:16.9 million hectares)were managed organically,overseen by over 480000 producers(European Union:over 419000).Within Europe,organic agriculture covered 3.7 percent of the agricultural area(European Union:10.4 percent).Organic farmland witnessed an increase of over 0.2 million hectares in Europe and 0.8 million hectares in the European Union compared to 2021.The leading countries in terms of organic agricultural areas were France(2.9 million hectares),Spain(2.7 million hectares),and Italy(2.3 million hectares).Notably,16 countries had at least 10 percent of their farmland dedicated to organic practices,with Liechtenstein leading at 43.0 percent,followed by Austria(27.5 percent)and Estonia(23.4 percent).In 2022,retail sales of organic products amounted to 53.1 billion euros(European Union:45.1 billion euros),representing a 2.2 percent decrease(-2.8%in the EU)since 2021.Germany ranked as the largest market for organic products with retail sales of 15.3 billion euros,followed by France(12.1 billion euros)and Switzerland(3.9 billion euros).(See the article by Willer et al.,page 129 for more details).Across Europe,43 countries have legislation governing organic agriculture(see article by Hysa et al.on page 112).While organic farmland grew by 5 percent,consolidated data for 2022 indicate stagnation or even decline in retail sales in several countries.To reach the European Commissions goal of 25 percent organic agriculture by 2030,stronger annual growth than in 2021 will be necessary.For more details see chapter by Willer et al,page 186.Imports of organic agri-food products in the EU declined from 2.87 million metric tons in 2021 to 2.73 million metric tons in 2022,marking a 5.1crease.This decline may be linked to reduced demand,likely stemming from a significant rise in food prices during the year.The decrease was mainly driven by reduced imports of fruit and vegetables,sugar,olive and palm oils,sunflower seed,and pet food,with increased imports of organic soybeans,oilcakes,citrus fruit,rice,and honey failing to offset these losses.For details,see the summary on EU organic imports on page 212.In June 2018,the European Union introduced Regulation 2018/848 for organic products,with amendments and additional regulations continuing until 2023.Notably,international trade in organic products shifted towards direct EU compliance in third countries instead of relying on equivalency agreements.The European Commissions initiatives like the European Green Deal,Farm to Fork,and Biodiversity Strategies aim to achieve sustainable food systems by 2030.However,a 2022 briefing by IFOAM Organics Europe revealed that many Member States lack ambition in developing and supporting organic farming.Without significant changes in Common Agricultural Policy(CAP)Strategic Plans,achieving the goal of 25 percent organic land in Europe by 2030 seems unlikely.For details,see contribution by Schmutzler et al.on page 173.Latin America and the Caribbean In Latin America,a workforce of over 270000 producers managed more than 9.5 million hectares of agricultural land organically in 2022.This area represented 9.9 percent of the worlds organic land and 1.3 percent of the regions agricultural land.Leading countries in the region were Argentina(4.1 million hectares),Uruguay(2.7 The World of Organic Agriculture 2024:Summary 34 FiBL&IFOAM Organics International(2024):The World of Organic Agriculture.Frick and Bonn million hectares),and Brazil(1.0 million hectares).Uruguay boasted the highest organic share of total agricultural land at 19.6 percent,followed by Dominica(11.6 percent)and French Guiana(11.1 percent).Several Latin American countries maintained their status as significant exporters of organic products,including coffee,cocoa,and bananas(see chapter on statistics on page 224).Nineteen countries in the region had l
2024-11-28
356页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-28
46页
5星级
1 Required Report:Required-Public Distribution Date:November 20,2024 Report Number:IT2024-0014 Repo.
2024-11-27
20页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-27
16页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-26
27页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-26
26页
5星级
United States Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service Cotton:World Markets and Trade .
2024-11-26
35页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-26
34页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-26
31页
5星级
THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARI.
2024-11-26
23页
5星级
Five Actions to Spur Catalytic Change in the Agrifood SystemThe role of improved measurement systems.
2024-11-25
22页
5星级
Assessing the Needs,Gaps,and Opportunities for Occupational Diving in AquacultureSTANDARDS RESEARCHMarch 2024ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE2csagroup.orgAuthorAnya Keefe,M.Sc.,Anya Keefe ConsultingResearch Advisory PanelDavid Parkes,Dive Certification Board of CanadaJonathan Chapple,Five Bells ConsultingLuke Aymar,Cooke AquacultureWarren Fulton,WorkSafeBCFiona Manning,CSA GroupCandace Sellar,CSA GroupRon Meyers,CSA Group(Project Manager)AcknowledgementsThe author thanks everyone who shared their time and expertise as key informants on this project.The author also wishes to thank Andrew Lichty,Erin Hare,Mahdieh Bazyari,and Tracy Hu for their assistance with the regulatory scan.Image credit for photographs used on pages 13,18,23 and 25:Camcor Diving ServicesDisclaimerThis work has been produced by the author and is owned by the Canadian Standards Association.It is designed to provide general information in regard to the subject matter covered.The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and interviewees.The author and Canadian Standards Association are not responsible for any loss or damage which might occur as a result of your reliance or use of the content in this publication.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE3csagroup.orgTable of ContentsExecutive Summary 51 Introduction 62 Purpose and Methods 62.1 Purpose 62.2 Methods 72.2.1 Review of the Scientific and Grey Literature 72.2.2 Environmental Scan of Relevant Regulations and Standards 72.2.3 Key Informant Interviews 82.2.4 Evaluation of CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4 83 Aquaculture 83.1 Aquaculture Production:Globally and in Canada 93.1.1 Global Aquaculture 93.1.2 Aquaculture in Canada 103.2 Occupational Health and Safety in Aquaculture 114 Occupational Diving 124.1 Occupational Diving Techniques 124.2 Hazards of Occupational Diving 124.2.1 Diving-Related Hazards and Risks 124.2.2 Diving-Related Risks of Injury and Mortality in Aquaculture 135 Relevant Occupational Diving Standards in Canada 136 Regulation of Aquaculture and Occupational Diving in Canada 156.1 Regulation of Aquaculture in Canada 166.2 Regulation of Occupational Diving in Canada 166.2.1 Terms Defined in the Occupational Diving Regulations 176.2.2 Scope and Application of the Occupational Diving Regulations 196.2.3 Types of Occupational Diving Regulated 19ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE4csagroup.org6.2.4 Prohibitions on SCUBA Diving 206.2.5 Maximum Permitted Depths for SCUBA Diving 216.2.6 Minimum Equipment Requirements for SCUBA and Surface-Supplied Diving 216.2.7 CSA Diving Standards Referenced in Regulation 217 Aquaculture-Specific Guidelines and Codes of Practice 227.1 Prince Edward Island Code of Practice 227.2 International Standards and Codes of Practice 227.2.1 United Kingdom 227.2.2 Australia 237.2.3 New Zealand 237.3 How Aquaculture-Specific Guidelines and Codes of Practice Compare 248 Key Gaps,Challenges,and Opportunities 258.1 Key Gaps and Challenges 258.1.1 Underestimation of Work-Related Injury,Illness,and Mortality 258.1.2 Lack of Consistency in the Occupational Diving Regulations 268.1.3 Absence of Canadian Aquaculture-Specific Guidelines or Codes of Practice 268.2 Opportunities for Standardization 278.2.1 A Standalone Standard for Diving in Aquaculture and Seafood Harvesting 278.2.2 Amendment of CSA Z275.2 278.2.3 An Informative Annex for Aquaculture 289 Conclusions 28References 30Appendix A Cross-Jurisdictional Comparison of Relevant Regulations 37A.1 How Key Terms are Defined in Statute or Regulation 37A.2 Cross-Canada Comparison of Relevant Occupational Diving Regulations 47A.3 Cross-Jurisdictional Comparisons of Key Criteria in Aquaculture-Specific Codes of Practice 52ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE5csagroup.orgExecutive SummaryThe rapid growth of aquaculture in Canada and around the world,coupled with the decline in offshore oil and gas-related occupational diving,has resulted in many divers migrating to the aquaculture and seafood harvesting industry.With this influx of workers,there is a need to understand whether Canadas current occupational diving regulatory framework and voluntary occupational diving standards are meeting the needs of the sector.The research conducted for this report evaluated which diving methods are appropriate for aquaculture,which tools and technologies are acceptable,and which skills and competencies occupational divers must possess to perform aquaculture and seafood harvesting jobs safely.This report synthesizes the findings from a review of the scientific and grey literature,an environmental scan of regulations and standards pertaining to occupational diving in general and to diving in aquaculture and seafood harvesting specifically,and key informant interviews.Key findings include:Although aquaculture is one of the fastest growing industries in Canada and around the world,it is understudied when it comes to occupational health and safety.Research conducted in Canada,Australia,and the European Union over the past two decades shows that,relative to other industries,aquaculture has high rates of lost time injuries and illnesses and a high incidence of fatalities.Divers in aquaculture experience higher risks of injury and mortality compared to divers in other industries.Furthermore,because the injury,fatality,and illness rates reported in the literature are based on workers compensation statistics,they likely under-represent actual injury and fatality rates in aquaculture.Despite the presence of a relatively robust regulatory framework,there are several gaps and inconsistencies in how occupational diving is regulated in Canada.Examples include a lack of alignment in some jurisdictions regulations and two of the standards in CSA Groups suite of occupational diving standards,and a lack of aquaculture-specific guidelines or codes of practice to assist with interpretation of and compliance with the regulations.Key informants indicated there was value in a standardization solution for aquaculture and seafood harvesting,which would allow for harmonization of occupational diving requirements across the country,as well as the creation of industry-and task-specific guidance.Two principal options emerged:(a)development of a new standalone standard for diving in aquaculture or(b)amendment of CSA Z275.2,Occupational safety code for diving operations.The preferred option is to amend CSA Z275.2 by creating a new section on aquaculture and seafood harvesting,which would address the key issues and gaps identified in this report and ensure that CSA Z275.2 reflects the needs of the aquaculture and seafood harvesting industry.In addition to amending CSA Z275.2,key informants indicated there was value in CSA Group developing an informative annex with guidelines for aquaculture diving that include preferred or recommended methods aquaculture employers can use to comply with the diving regulations,and that provide guidance to help interpret and achieve compliance with the regulations.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE6csagroup.org“There is a need to understand which diving methods are appropriate,which tools and technologies are acceptable,and which skills and competencies occupational divers must possess to perform aquaculture and seafood harvesting jobs safely.”1 IntroductionOccupational diving standards in Canada fall under the mandate of the CSA Z275 Occupational Diving Technical Committee.CSA Group is looking to strengthen key occupational diving standards that are referenced in occupational health and safety(OHS)regulations across Canada to ensure the standards continue to be evidence-informed,include leading practices for occupational diving both in Canada and internationally,and are reflective of the needs of growing sectors,such as aquaculture and seafood harvesting.The diving needs and requirements for occupational divers in the aquaculture and seafood harvesting industry are not well understood and may not be sufficiently addressed in the current suite of the CSA Group occupational diving standards.With the decline in offshore oil and gas-related occupational diving,many divers are migrating to the aquaculture and seafood harvesting industry.There is a need to understand which diving methods are appropriate,which tools and technologies are acceptable,and which skills and competencies occupational divers must possess to perform aquaculture and seafood harvesting jobs safely.2 Purpose and Methods2.1 PurposeThis research was conducted to better understand the needs,gaps,and opportunities for occupational diving in the aquaculture and seafood harvesting industry.The specific objectives were to:Explore the academic literature on occupational diving practices for aquaculture and seafood harvesting;Examine if and how other jurisdictions are addressing the needs of this sector,including key issues such as supplied air diving versus SCUBA diving,the depths to which these approaches can be used,hoisting and brailing,and the use of specific tools by occupational divers;Identify where the gaps and challenges are in occupational diving as it pertains to the aquaculture and seafood harvesting sector through targeted key informant interviews;Evaluate CSA Z275.2:20,Occupational safety code for diving operations and CSA Z275.4:22,Competency standard for diving,hyperbaric chamber,and remotely operated vehicle operations,based on the outcome of the literature review,environmental scan,and key informant interviews;andASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE7csagroup.org Provide recommendations on how future updates to CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4 can address and reflect the needs of occupational divers in the aquaculture and seafood harvesting sectors.2.2 MethodsThe following activities were undertaken to achieve the projects objectives:a review of the scientific and grey literature;an environmental scan of occupational diving and aquaculture regulations in Canada and select international jurisdictions;key informant interviews;and an evaluation of CSA Group occupational diving standards(CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4).2.2.1 Review of the Scientific and Grey LiteratureAn iterative strategy was developed to search three bibliographic databases1 of scientific(i.e.,peer-reviewed)and grey literature.Initial search terms included“aquaculture”,“occupational health”,and“occupational safety”.The initial searches yielded 128 potential articles.The searches were then rerun with“aquaculture”in combination with additional terms such as“occupational diving”,“commercial diving”,“professional diving”,“hazards”,“risk factors”,“safety”,“injuries”,“fatalities”,“decompression sickness”,“entrapment”,“entanglement”,“best practices”,“fish farm”,“shellfish”,and“finfish”.These supplemental searches yielded an additional 23 potential articles.The titles and abstracts of the 151 identified articles were then screened for relevance to the project.No restriction on publication date was imposed,and only papers published in English were included.Articles were restricted to those that focused on aquaculture and seafood harvesting in North America,the European Union,Australia,and New Zealand.Studies that focused on occupational hazards or accidents on board commercial fishing vessels(such as falls overboard)or occupational risks for commercial fishers were excluded.Based on these criteria,103 articles were excluded,leaving 48 articles for full text review.1 MEDLINE(Ovid),PubMed,and Google Scholar.2.2.2 Environmental Scan of Relevant Regulations and StandardsThe environmental scan identified policy instruments that govern both aquaculture and occupational diving.The scope of the scan was delineated by the following terms:“aquaculture”,“occupational diving”,“commercial diving”,and“underwater operations”.Within each jurisdiction scanned,the search started with the official website of the organization with responsibility for aquaculture,occupational diving,or OHS(i.e.,the“regulator”).Relevant documents and webpages were downloaded or bookmarked using the hyperlinks and search engines located within the regulators official website.All applicable statutes in Canada(as well as any related regulations,standards,and codes of practice)were examined to identify any reference to occupational diving.Where a policy instrument seemed relevant to the project,the wording of the applicable section was extracted verbatim and recorded.A series of tables were developed to summarize the applicable regulatory requirements,examine similarities and differences between jurisdictions,and identify any gaps in the regulatory approaches adopted and implemented.A subset of these tables is included in Appendix A.The scan focused on seven Canadian provinces(British Columbia,Ontario,Quebec,New Brunswick,Newfoundland and Labrador,Nova Scotia,and Prince Edward Island)and the federal jurisdiction.These provinces were selected due to their prominence in production volume and species farmed.Although Canadian jurisdictions were the primary focus,the scan also included the European Union(Norway),the United Kingdom,Australia,and New Zealand.These jurisdictions were chosen because they have a similar aquaculture industry to Canadas(i.e.,Norway),they have a similar OHS framework to Canadas(i.e.,Australia,New Zealand),or they have aquaculture-specific codes of practice to supplement their occupational diving regulations(the United Kingdom,Australia,and New Zealand).ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE8csagroup.org2.2.3 Key Informant InterviewsTo enrich our understanding of the central issues pertaining to occupational diving in aquaculture and seafood harvesting,key informant interviews were conducted with representatives from the East and West coasts of Canada,as well as other prominent individuals identified in the literature review or environmental scan.Potential key informants were invited via email to participate,and those who agreed were contacted to arrange an interview via Zoom.Prior to the interviews,key informants were provided with a high level overview of the projects objectives and were advised that the interview would focus on three questions:1.What are the primary issues with diving in the aquaculture and seafood harvesting sector?2.What are the key gaps and challenges?3.Might these gaps and challenges be addressed by a standardization solution?Eight individuals from across Canada were interviewed.All had an understanding of the hazards of occupational diving and/or the aquaculture and seafood harvesting sector.Key informants represented provincial OHS regulators,the aquaculture and seafood harvesting sector,academia,and occupational diving organizations.Each interview lasted between 45 and 60 minutes,was transcribed in real-time using Otter transcription software,and analyzed for common themes using Quirkos qualitative analysis software.Before each interview began,consent was obtained from each participant to participate in the interview and for the interview to be recorded for transcription and data analysis purposes.2.2.4 Evaluation of CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4The following two standards were evaluated at a high level:CSA Z275.2:20,Occupational safety code for diving operations2 All fish except crustaceans,sea urchins,and other echinoderms,molluscs,shellfish,and marine mammals(e.g.,seals,whales,etc.).CSA Z275.4:22,Competency standard for diving,hyperbaric chamber,and remotely operated vehicle operationsKey issues that emerged from the literature review,the environmental scan,and the key informant interviews were mapped onto relevant sections of each standard to identify areas where gaps existed and where there might be opportunities for improvement.3 AquacultureAquaculture is defined as the farming or cultivation of aquatic organisms,such as finfish2,molluscs,crustaceans,other aquatic animals,and aquatic plants in controlled marine or freshwater aquatic environments 1-3.Aquaculture businesses breed,rear,and harvest aquatic plants and animals in the ocean,as well as in ponds,rivers,lakes,and“closed”land-based systems 2,3.Marine aquaculture refers to the farming of oceanic species,such as salmon,oysters,and clams,whereas freshwater aquaculture refers to the farming of freshwater species,such as trout 2.As depicted in Figure 1,there are four main types of aquaculture operations 4:1.Inland freshwater net pens and land-based systems;2.Bottom culture shellfish operations in intertidal zones;3.Bottom culture shellfish grow-out areas in subtidal zones;and 4.Long-lines,net pens,and restocking operations in open water.Although its primary purpose is the cultivation and preparation of aquatic species for human consumption,aquaculture is also used to rebuild populations of endangered and threatened species,restore aquatic habitats,enhance wild stocks of freshwater and marine species,produce baitfish,and breed fish for zoos and aquariums 2,3.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE9csagroup.orgFigure 1:Types of Aquaculture OperationsNote.Reproduced from 4.Freshwaternet penLand-based systemsBottom culture/enhancement-IntertidalLong-line/RaftNet penCultured-basedfisheriesHigh water markLow water markBottom culture/enhancement-Subtidal3.1 Aquaculture Production:Globally and in Canada3.1.1 Global AquacultureAquaculture is one of the fastest growing forms of food production in the world.Since 1950,global aquaculture production has grown significantly.3 As shown in Figure 2,it has been the main driver of growth in total fisheries production(includes both capture fisheries4 and aquaculture)for the last four decades 5.Between 1990 and 2020,global aquaculture of aquatic animals 3 In 1950,aquaculture accounted for 4%of total fisheries production;in 2020,it accounted for 49%.4 Capture fisheries are defined by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO)as the harvesting(i.e.,fishing and catching)of wild fish and seafish via technologies,vessels,and equipment that range from artisanal to highly industrial.5 Excludes cultivation and harvesting of algae.Total production,including algae and aquatic animals,in 2020 was 122.6 million tonnes,an increase of approximately 609%over total production in 1990.grew from 13.1 million tonnes of output to 87.5 million tonnes,5 an overall increase of approximately 568%5.During this period,the average annual growth rate was 6.5%for aquatic animal production,7.3%for algae,and 6.7%for all aquaculture production(i.e.,including algae and aquatic animals)5.The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO)projects that global aquaculture will continue to grow over the coming decade,reaching an estimated 100 million tonnes of output by 2027 and 106 million tonnes by 2030 5.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE10csagroup.orgFigure 2:Trend in Global Capture Fisheries and Aquaculture Production,19502020Note.Includes algae;excludes aquatic mammals,crocodiles,alligators,and caimans.Reproduced from 5.2502001501005001950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020Aquaculture production Capture fisheries production TotalMillion TonnesFinfish farming accounts for the largest share of global production of aquatic animals.In 2020,the total global output from finfish farming was 57.5 million tonnes(or 66%of total aquatic animal production).Of this,49.1 million tonnes was produced through inland aquaculture and 8.3 million tonnes was produced through aquaculture in the ocean and on the shore 5.In 2020,global production of molluscs and crustaceans was 17.7 million tonnes and 11.2 million tonnes,respectively 5.3.1.2 Aquaculture in CanadaAquaculture is also a growing industry in Canada.In 2021,the total aquaculture production volume was 191,249 tonnes,an increase of approximately 286%over the 49,594 tonnes produced in 1991 6,7.Farming and fish processing activities in aquaculture provided 21,300 full-time jobs in 2019,driving the economy in many coastal,rural,and Aboriginal communities 8-10.As shown in Table 1,aquaculture occurs in all ten Canadian provinces and in the Yukon.British Columbia is the largest contributor to the industry in Canada,6 The total volume of finfish was 148,710 tonnes and the value was approximately$1.222 billion.followed by New Brunswick,Prince Edward Island,and Newfoundland and Labrador 6.Finfish represents the largest share of aquaculture in Canada,accounting for 78%of the total volume produced in 2021 and 91%of the total value generated6 6,7.Of the 27 finfish species cultivated,salmon dominated in both volume and value 4,6-8.According to Statistics Canada,120,186 tonnes of salmon were produced in 2021(81%of all finfish production)at a value of approximately$1 billion(82%of all finfish value)7.Of the 20 species of shellfish cultivated on the East and West coasts,mussels and oysters were the most significant,with 22,567 tonnes and 17,344 tonnes produced in 2021,respectively 4,7,8.The total value of shellfish cultivated in Canada in 2021 was$122.3 million 7.Fisheries and Oceans Canada projects a continued,but moderate,growth in the Canadian aquaculture sector into 2027 11.This will be mainly driven by a growth in cultivation of salmonid species in response to a projected increase of 40%(approximately 2 million tonnes)in world salmon consumption by 2027.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE11csagroup.orgTable 1:Aquaculture in Canada by Species Category and ProvinceProvince or TerritoryPercentage of Total in 2021Species CategoryVolume(tonnes)Value($)FinfishShellfishPlantBritish Columbia5055XXXAlberta1XSaskatchewan1XManitoba1XOntario33XQuebec11XXNewfoundland and Labrador1011XXNova Scotia66XXNew Brunswick1619XXXPrince Edward Island134XXYukon1XData sources:https:/www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/stats/aqua/aqua21-eng.htm and Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance 8.1 Data were suppressed to meet confidentiality requirements of the Statistics Act(Alberta,Saskatchewan,Manitoba)or was not listed(Yukon).3.2 Occupational Health and Safety in AquacultureWorkers in aquaculture are exposed to a wide range of hazards,including safety(e.g.,diving,underwater entrapment),physical(e.g.,cold temperatures),chemical(e.g.,antibiotics),biological(e.g.,fish feed,microbes,dead fish),ergonomic(e.g.,repetitive motion),and psychosocial(e.g.,shift work,remote locations,large fish kills)12-18.The extent to which workers are exposed to these hazards depends on a number of factors,including type of operation(e.g.,marine vs.freshwater,land-or water-based),volume of production,and specific species farmed or cultured(e.g.,finfish vs.shellfish vs.aquatic plants)12,19.Although OHS in aquaculture is understudied compared to other industries,it has been attracting increasing attention since the 1990s from researchers in Australia,Norway,Finland,the United States,and Canada 12-17,19-43.Studies have shown that aquaculture has high rates of lost time injuries and 7 Newfoundland and Labrador,New Brunswick,Nova Scotia,and Prince Edward Island.8 Includes claims for both lost time injuries and injuries with no lost time.9 Norway,Finland,Australia,and the United States.illnesses and a high incidence of fatalities relative to other industries 14,18,21,27,31,36,38-45.The most commonly reported injuries and illnesses in the literature include:musculoskeletal injuries,asthma and other respiratory symptoms,skin infections and dermatitis,falls,cuts and punctures,entanglement,and decompression sickness 12,14,18,38,42,44.Some research has been conducted on the risk of injuries,illnesses,and fatalities in the Canadian aquaculture industry.An analysis of workers compensation claims data in four Atlantic provinces7 found lost time injury rates that ranged from 1.76 per 100 workers(Prince Edward Island)to 4.3 per 100 workers(Nova Scotia),and total8 injury rates that ranged from 4.3 per 100 workers(Newfoundland and Labrador)to 11.9 per 100 workers(Nova Scotia)21.The authors noted that although injury rates among aquaculture workers fluctuated over the study period(1996 to 2016),they exceeded average provincial rates and were higher than rates in other countries,9 where aquaculture is ranked amongst the most hazardous ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE12csagroup.orgindustries 21,43.A similar pattern was seen in British Columbia 43.A 2017 investigation by The Globe and Mail reported that for the period 2011 to 2015,the occupation of“aquaculture and marine harvest labourers”had the sixth highest average traumatic injury fatality rate in Canada at 43.5 per 100,000 46-48.4 Occupational DivingOccupational diving10 is underwater diving that is carried out in the course of employment 49,50.Occupational divers are employed in a spectrum of industries(e.g.,offshore oil and gas,underwater construction and repair,aquaculture,military,and scientific research)and perform a range of tasks that include inspecting,constructing,installing,maintaining,repairing,and removing underwater structures(e.g.,bridges,platforms,vessel hulls,water lines,etc.);installing,maintaining,and repairing sewage lines;fabricating equipment;surveying;welding and cutting;drilling and blasting;and salvage and recovery of structures that have sunk or fallen into water 49,51-53.The kinds of tasks that occupational divers perform in the aquaculture industry include maintaining nets,lines,pontoons,and jetties;cleaning,untangling,and repairing nets,lines,and pens;feeding fish;and clearing dead fish(i.e.,morts)from pens 19,54.4.1 Occupational Diving TechniquesOccupational divers are trained and certified to dive to a maximum depth that is set out in regulations,standards,or codes of practice.Three principal techniques are used in occupational diving:SCUBA diving,surface-supplied diving,and closed bell diving 51,55.SCUBA Diving:Divers carry their own cylinders of breathing gas and receive their air supply via a Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus 51,54,55.10 Other terms include professional diving or commercial diving.11 Defined in CSA Z275.2 as“a composite hose/cable or separate cables,extending from the surface to the diver or to the pressure vessel of occupancy by the diver,that supplies any combination of breathing gas,power,heat,pneumofathometer,communications,and a strength member as required.”12 CSA Z275.2 refers to“closed bell”as a“submersible compression chamber”(SCC).13 Defined in CSA Z275.2 as“a respirable breathing mixture,other than air,that provides adequate oxygen to support life and is designed to minimize detrimental physiological effects,particularly excessive breathing resistance or impairment of neurological function”.Examples include Nitrox(a mixture of nitrogen and oxygen)and Trimix(a mixture of nitrogen,oxygen,and helium).Surface-Supplied Diving:Divers are connected to the dive location by an umbilical11 and receive their air supply via a Surface-Supplied Breathing Apparatus 51,54-56.Closed Bell Diving:Divers live in a pressurized environment,are transferred to and from the underwater work site in a hyperbaric chamber12 specifically designed for that purpose,and breathe mixed gas13 51,54-56.The two techniques most relevant to this report are SCUBA and surface-supplied diving.Each has advantages and disadvantages.The principal advantages of surface-supplied diving are that there is a physical link between the diver and the surface,and the diver has a continuous supply of breathing gas.The lack of a physical link between the diver and the surface and the limited supply of breathing gas are the principal disadvantages of SCUBA diving.The principal disadvantages of surface-supplied diving are that the divers mobility and range is limited by the length of the umbilical cord connecting them to the surface,the umbilical cord can create a hazard in strong currents and situations where entanglement is likely to occur,and the umbilical cord can potentially become damaged during the diving operation.Conversely,the absence of an umbilical cord is the principal advantage of SCUBA diving(i.e.,the diver has mobility and flexibility to swim in various locations and there are fewer hazards from physical equipment attachments).4.2 Hazards of Occupational Diving4.2.1 Diving-Related Hazards and RisksOccupational divers are exposed to a range of hazards,including cold water immersion,hyperbaric conditions,environmental conditions,as well as physical,biological,and chemical hazards associated with the work being performed 52,57,58.The physical ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE13csagroup.orgdemands of the job,the type of diving operation,the number of dives,and the nature of the dives performed(i.e.,type of dive,frequency14 and duration of dive)can exacerbate these hazards 52,57.Adverse health effects experienced by occupational divers include gas narcosis,oxygen and carbon dioxide gas toxicities,pain and barotrauma,decompression sickness,and dysbaric osteonecrosis 54,59-61.4.2.2 Diving-Related Risks of Injury and Mortality in Aquaculture Diving is a serious occupational hazard in the aquaculture industry 12-14,18-21,23,26,27,29,31-36,39-43,54,62.The earliest case reports,published in the 1990s and early 2000s,described incidents of decompression illness in divers in the Tasmanian aquaculture industry that appeared to be caused by repeated short dives 29-31,62,63.In 2016,researchers in Norway reported that in comparison to rescue divers,15 divers in fish farming were three times more likely to(a)experience adverse health outcomes such as decompression sickness,(b)perform physically demanding dives,and(c)often have no day off work after three days of physically demanding diving 35.Divers in fish farming were 8.5 times more likely than other divers to carry on diving after 14 Includes repeated short dives(i.e.,repetitive or bounce/yo-yo diving)and multi-day diving.15 The study compared rescue divers to diving instructors,fish farming divers,quay/construction divers,and offshore/oil-related divers.Rescue divers were selected as the reference group because they reported the lowest number of dives.16 Performed as part of a project evaluating the utility of diving computers.a physically demanding dive 35.A study of fatalities in the Norwegian aquaculture industry reported that of the 33 fatalities that occurred between 1982 and 2015,seven occurred on fish farms and of those,four were connected to diving activities 41.Three divers became entangled while collecting dead fish or performing maintenance on the net cage and one got stuck in the piping at an outlet in a land-based fish farm 41.An analysis of 31 occupational divers treated for decompression sickness at Vancouver General Hospital in British Columbia16 found that of the 19 cases where type of occupational diving was reported,16 were employed in either aquaculture(n=9)or seafood harvesting(n=7)64.5 Relevant Occupational Diving Standards in CanadaThe two occupational diving standards most relevant to this research are CSA Z275.2:20,Occupational safety code for diving operations,and CSA Z275.4:22,Competency standard for diving,hyperbaric chamber,and remotely operated vehicle operations.The seventh edition of CSA Z275.2 was published in 2020 and includes 12 sections,12 informative annexes,and criteria written in a manner that allows compliance with the Standard itself and with applicable legislated In comparison to rescue divers,divers in fish farming were three times more likely to(a)experience adverse health outcomes such as decompression sickness,(b)perform physically demanding dives,and(c)often have no day off work after three days of physically demanding diving.”ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE14csagroup.orgrequirements in Canada 56.The fourth edition of CSA Z275.4 was published in 2022 and includes 33 sections that provide uniform minimum competency requirements for the various levels of occupational SCUBA diving,surface-supplied diving,and deep diving 65.Both CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4 apply to occupational diving operations“conducted in connection with all types of work and employment”56,65.CSA Z275.2 describes occupational safety requirements(i.e.,equipment requirements and operational procedures)for SCUBA diving,surface-supplied diving,deep diving,one-atmosphere diving,and diving in contaminated environments 56.CSA Z275.4 describes minimum competency requirements for all levels of personnel17 associated with occupational SCUBA diving,surface-supplied diving,18 and deep diving19 65.Neither CSA Z275.2 nor CSA Z275.4 applies to scientific diving(as defined in Clause 3 of each standard),recreational/sport diving,or recreational/sport dive training;and neither describes work techniques associated with underwater diving operations 56,65.CSA Z275.4 does not include competency requirements for unexploded explosive ordinance diving operations(those are found in CSA Z275.6:16(R2021),Unexploded explosive ordnance(UXO),munitions,and police explosive diving)65.Specific criteria in CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4 relevant to occupational diving in aquaculture include:Working Categories:Clauses 6.2,9.2,10.2,and 29.2 of CSA Z275.4 set out that seafood harvesting and aquaculture are working categories for occupational SCUBA divers,restricted surface-supplied divers,unrestricted surface-supplied divers,and nitrox SCUBA divers 65.17 Divers/pilots,tenders,dive supervisors,hyperbaric chamber operators,life support technicians,diving medical technicians,diving safety specialists,diving physicians and hyperbaric physicians,and remote operating vehicle pilots/technicians.18 Covers air(restricted and unrestricted categories),nitrox(restricted and unrestricted categories),and mixed gas.19 Covers bell,saturation,and atmospheric diving system techniques.20 Includes those operating and those not currently operable but capable of being operated at any time.21 A process involving the use of high-pressure water streams to remove clogs and clear debris from drainpipes and sewer lines.22 Defined in CSA Z275.2 as“a situation in which a diver is tethered to a vessel under way that is not a DPV.”DPV is the acronym for“dynamic positioned vehicle,”which is defined as“a computer-controlled vessel incorporating a system to automatically maintain a vessels position and heading by using its own propellers and thrusters.”Scope of Working Conditions:Clauses 6.3,9.3,10.3,and 29.3 of CSA Z275.4 describe the scope of environmental working conditions for occupational SCUBA divers,restricted surface-supplied divers,unrestricted surface-supplied divers,and nitrox SCUBA divers 65.Each clause notes that the scope depends on the geographic location of the diving work and lists diving technique-specific examples(e.g.,water currents,visibility,water temperature,ice cover,and marine life hazards)65.Restricted surface-supplied diving is the only technique for which an aquaculture-specific risk is identified.Clause 9.3 states that one of the hazards faced by these divers is entanglement,particularly when working around kelp beds and fish nets 65.Prohibitions:Clauses 7.1.3,7.1.4,7.1.6,and 8.1.2 of CSA Z275.2 list the underwater activities from which occupational SCUBA and restricted surface-supplied divers are prohibited 56.Clauses 7.1.3 and 7.1.4 prohibit SCUBA from being used for diving operations involving underwater intakes/exhausts,20 water control structures,and/or entry into pipes and other penetrations;as well as welding,burning/cutting,high-pressure jetting,21 hoisting,dredging,the use of power tools,planned diving beyond the no-compression limit,diving in a contaminated environment,and the use or handling of explosives 56.CSA Z275.2 also provides exceptions to this prohibition for the latter two activities.Clause 7.1.6 prohibits SCUBA in“water with a current of 1 knot or greater,unless the diver is tethered by a lifeline”56.Clause 8.1.2 similarly prohibits restricted surface-supplied diving on operations involving welding,burning/cutting,high-pressure jetting,explosives,hoisting,dredging,working in a contaminated environment,and liveboating22 56.Because one of the activities in aquaculture ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE15csagroup.orginvolves the brailing of fish(i.e.,hoisting fish using a brail net),the prohibitions on SCUBA and restricted surface-supplied diving during operations involving hoisting have been flagged by representatives of the aquaculture industry as potential barriers to their adoption of CSA Z275.2.Maximum Depths:Both CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4 include maximum diving depths for the different categories of divers.Maximum allowable depths are reported in CSA Z275.2 in metres and feet,and in CSA Z275.4 in units of metres of sea water23(msw)and feet of sea water24(fsw).Clause 7.2 of CSA Z275.2 states that the maximum depth for a SCUBA diver is 30 metres(or 99 feet)56.Clauses 6.1,9.1,10.1,and 29.1 of CSA Z275.4 set out maximum depths for occupational SCUBA divers(30 msw or 99 fsw),restricted surface-supplied divers(30 msw or 99 fsw),unrestricted surface-supplied divers(50 msw or 165 fsw),and nitrox SCUBA divers(30 msw or 99 fsw)65.The SCUBA restriction applies except when greater depths are permitted by the applicable provincial,territorial,or federal regulator 56,65.Equipment:Clause 7.8.1 of CSA Z275.2 lists the minimum equipment requirements for occupational SCUBA divers,which include:Open-circuit SCUBA,complete with demand regulator and tank with quick-release harness and bailout;A face mask;A suitable,strong and sharp knife;A weight belt with a quick-release closure;A submersible pressure gauge;An exposure suit or protective clothing appropriate for the condition of work and the temperature of the water;An inflatable buoyancy device;An underwater watch with elapsed time-time indicator;23 Defined as“pressure at an equivalent depth below the surface of sea water,in metres.”24 Defined as“pressure at an equivalent depth below the surface of sea water,in feet.”A submersible depth gauge;A device for summoning aid and receiving a recall from the surface while submerged;A rescue beacon or strobe when SCUBA diving operations are to be carried on during the hours of darkness;and A full body harness complete with lifting ring 56.Clause 8.3.1 of CSA Z275.2 states that surface-supplied divers require the equipment referenced in Clauses 8 and 6,but does not include a discrete list of required items 56.Equipment covered in Clause 8 includes air lines,bailout system,non-return valves,full-body harness,umbilicals,two-way voice communication,and a secondary means of communication.Equipment covered in Clause 6 includes gauges and metering equipment,compressed breathing air system,oxygen installations,compressed breathing air pipelines,lifeline systems,communications,a strong sharp knife,and a full-body harness with lifting ring 56.6 Regulation of Aquaculture and Occupational Diving in CanadaThe legal framework for aquaculture includes legislative instruments that address specific aquaculture activities(e.g.,licences,leases,etc.),as well as the broader context in which aquaculture takes place.In Canada,aquaculture is governed by multiple regulatory frameworks that operate at the federal,provincial and territorial,and local levels.These include fisheries,environment,food safety,maritime safety,and OHS 13,66.Similar fragmentation is seen in other jurisdictions,with multiple government agencies having responsibility and oversight for different aspects of the industry 12,16,22,23,25,38.For example,in Norway,the aquaculture industry is subject to 12 different safety-related regulations enforced by five different regulatory authorities 22,23,25.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE16csagroup.org6.1 Regulation of Aquaculture in CanadaIn Canada,responsibility for management of the aquaculture industry falls under federal,provincial and territorial,or shared jurisdiction 67,68.The federal government has jurisdiction over day-to-day operations and oversight in British Columbia and Prince Edward Island,and food safety in all provinces and territories 68.Provincial and territorial governments have jurisdiction over site approval in all provinces and territories except British Columbia and Prince Edward Island,land/seabed management in all provinces except Prince Edward Island,and day-to-day operations and oversight in all provinces except British Columbia and Prince Edward Island 68.The federal and provincial/territorial governments share jurisdiction over site approval in British Columbia and Prince Edward Island,land/seabed management in Prince Edward Island,introductions and transfers of live eggs and fish in all provinces and territories,and drugs and pesticide approval in all provinces and territories 68.Federally,aquaculture is governed by six regulations25 under the Fisheries Act 69.Fisheries and Oceans Canada is undertaking a phased consolidation of all its aquaculture-specific regulatory provisions into one comprehensive regulation,which will be called the General Aquaculture Regulations 70.At the provincial and territorial level,aquaculture is governed by a range of statutes and regulations administered by ministries of fisheries,agriculture,forestry,natural resources,and the environment 69.Across Canada,the definition of aquaculture varies by jurisdiction 71-79.For example,aquaculture is defined in the federal Aquaculture Activities Regulations and the Pacific Aquaculture Regulations as“the cultivation of fish”76,77.In New Brunswick,it is defined as“the farming of aquatic organisms for commercial or scientific purposes”74.In Newfoundland and Labrador,it is defined as“the farming of fish,molluscs,crustaceans,aquatic plants and other cultured aquatic organisms with an intervention in the rearing process to enhance 25 Aquaculture Activities Regulations(SOR/2015-177),Fishery(General)Regulations(SOR/93-53),Marine Mammal Regulations(SOR/93-56),Pacific Aquaculture Regulations(SOR/2010-270),Pacific Fishery Regulations(SOR/93-54),and Management of Contaminated Fisheries Regulations(SOR/90-351).26 The Occupational Health and Safety Act or the Workers Compensation Act.27 A performance-based regulation is goal-oriented.It establishes the end point and allows the employer to identify the most suitable means of achieving it.28 A prescriptive regulation specifies the end point and the means to achieve it.production by activities such as stocking,feeding,harvesting and protection from predation,and includes fallowing and the placement,removal and cleaning of aquaculture gear”75.See Table A-1 in Appendix A.1 for a cross-jurisdictional comparison of how the term“aquaculture”is defined.6.2 Regulation of Occupational Diving in CanadaOccupational diving in Canada is regulated under OHS and offshore oil and gas legislative frameworks.The OHS framework is the most relevant to this report.In Canada,OHS falls under federal,provincial,or territorial authority,and responsibility for prevention and enforcement is either held by a government ministry or department(typically the Ministry of Labour)or by the agency responsible for the delivery of the workers compensation system 80.OHS provisions are found in statutes26 and subordinate regulations,and are intended to establish a minimum level of protection for all workers or for those in specific industries.Typically,the OHS legislative and regulatory framework incorporates general duty clauses,as well as hazard-specific requirements,and sets out the parameters for enforcement and compliance(which may be mandatory or voluntary,performance-based27 or prescriptive,28 depending on the hazard).All eight of the Canadian jurisdictions scanned for this project have occupational diving regulations pursuant to their respective Occupational Health and Safety Act(see Table 2).The OHS regulations in six of the jurisdictions include a specific section that applies to occupational diving.Of these,four(British Columbia,Quebec,New Brunswick,and the federal government)set out comprehensive requirements for occupational diving,and two(Prince Edward Island,Newfoundland and Labrador)set out that CSA Z275.2 applies to underwater diving operations 81-86.The remaining two jurisdictions(Ontario and Nova Scotia)have enacted standalone occupational diving regulations 87,88.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE17csagroup.orgTable 2:Occupational Diving Regulations Pursuant to Occupational Health and Safety Acts BCONQCNLNSNBPECAOHS regulations contain section that sets out comprehensive diving requirementsXXXXOHS regulations contain section that incorporate CSA diving standards by referenceXXStandalone diving regulationsXXTermsBCONQCNLNSNBPECAatmospheric diving systemXXXXXbail-out systemXXXXXbottom timeXXXXXXXcontaminated environmentXXXXXdecompression schedule or table(s)XXXXXdeep divingXXXXXXdiverXXXXXXdivers tender XXXXXXdiving supervisor XXXXXhyperbaric chamber XXXXXXXliveboating XXXXXXmixed gasXXXXXno decompression limit XXXXXsaturation divingXXXXXSCUBA XXXXXXstage XXXXXXXstandby diver XXXXXsubmersible compression chamber(SCC)XXXXXXXtherapeutic recompression XXXXXTable 3:Occupational Diving-Related Terms Defined by Five or more Jurisdictions Indicates provinces that have incorporated by reference CSA Z275.2 in their regulations.6.2.1 Terms Defined in the Occupational Diving RegulationsAcross the eight jurisdictions scanned,a total of 186 occupational diving-related terms are defined in the various regulations(see Table A-2 in Appendix A.1).Of these,104 are terms defined in CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4,and they are included in Table A-2 because two jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)have incorporated by reference CSA Z275.2 instead of developing their own requirements for occupational diving.Some terms are defined by only one jurisdiction(e.g.,area of influence,defined in Quebecs regulations),whereas others are defined by up to seven jurisdictions(e.g.,bottom time,defined in all except the federal government).As shown in Table 3,only 19 terms are defined by five or more jurisdictions.A comparative review of the definitions across the eight jurisdictions identified inconsistencies in some of the terms that are used and how they are defined,including the following:ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE18csagroup.org Bottom Time:The regulations in five of the eight jurisdictions(British Columbia,Ontario,Quebec,Nova Scotia,New Brunswick)include a definition of bottom time.Two jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)have adopted the definition found in CSA Z275.2.The federal regulations do not define bottom time.Across the seven jurisdictions with a definition,the language used to define the term is relatively consistent.(See Table A-3,Appendix A.1.)Contaminated Environment:The regulations in three of the eight jurisdictions(British Columbia,Quebec,the federal government)include a definition of contaminated environment.Two jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)have adopted the definition found in CSA Z275.2.The regulations in Ontario,Nova Scotia,and New Brunswick do not define contaminated environment.Three jurisdictions(British Columbia,Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)define contaminated environment in the context of endangering the health and safety of a worker;Quebec defines it in the context of a contaminated liquid environment;and the federal government defines it in the context of chemical or biological effluent(point of discharge or site of accumulation),an oil spill site,or a radioactive spill site.(See Table A-4,Appendix A.1.)Decompression Sickness:Three different terms are used to refer to the physiological effects that occur during decompression that is too rapid:decompression accident(Quebec),decompression illness(British Columbia),and decompression sickness(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island,New Brunswick).Although all refer to the formation of gas bubbles due to pressure reduction,the language used to define the term varies across jurisdictions.British Columbia and New Brunswick refer to the physiological effects as a“dysfunction”and an“illness”,respectively,whereas CSA Z275.2(incorporated by reference in Newfoundland and Labrador and Prince Edward Island)refers to the effects as a“disease”.(See Table A-5,Appendix A.1.)Diver:The regulations in four jurisdictions(Ontario,Nova Scotia,New Brunswick,the federal government)include a definition of diver.Two jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)have adopted the definition found in CSA Z275.2.Two jurisdictions(British Columbia,Quebec)do not define diver.There is no consistency in how the term is defined.Four jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island,New Brunswick,the federal government)define a diver as a“person who performs work under water”.Three jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island,the federal government)require that the person be“competent”or“qualified”,and three(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island,New Brunswick)require that the person be paid.Ontario and Nova Scotia are the sole jurisdictions that incorporate a requirement that the work be performed at an atmospheric pressure greater than surface air pressure.(See Table A-6,Appendix A.1.)“Three different terms are used to refer to the physiological effects that occur during decompression that is too rapid:decompression accident(Quebec),decompression illness(British Columbia),and decompression sickness(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island,New Brunswick).”ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE19csagroup.org SCUBA:The regulations in four jurisdictions(British Columbia,Ontario,Nova Scotia,New Brunswick)include a definition of SCUBA.Two jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)have adopted the definition found in CSA Z275.2.Three(British Columbia,Ontario,Nova Scotia)define it as a“self-contained underwater breathing apparatus”;the remaining three clarify that the breathing apparatus is open-circuit compressed air.Two jurisdictions(Quebec,the federal government)do not define SCUBA,although Quebec does define“SCUBA diving”to mean“any diving carried out with an open-circuit underwater breathing apparatus attached only to at least one cylinder containing a breathing mixture worn by a diver”.Quebecs regulations also include a definition of“free-swimming SCUBA diving”.(See Table A-7,Appendix A.1.)Surface-Supplied Diving:The term used for this type of diving varies across the eight jurisdictions.One jurisdiction(Nova Scotia)refers to it as“surface-supplied dive”,one(the federal government)refers to it as“surface supply dive”,three(British Columbia,Quebec,and New Brunswick)refer to it as“surface supply diving”,and three(Ontario,Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)refer to it as“surface-supplied diving”.The language used to define each term and describe the diving technique varies across the jurisdictions.(See Table A-8,Appendix A.1.)Umbilical:Two terms with essentially the same meaning are used across seven of the eight jurisdictions:“umbilical”and“umbilical bundle”.The regulations in two jurisdictions(Quebec,New Brunswick)include a definition of umbilical;the regulations in three jurisdictions(British Columbia,Ontario,Nova Scotia)include a definition of umbilical bundle.Two jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)have adopted the definition of umbilical found in CSA Z275.2.The federal regulations do not define umbilical,although they use the term in their definition of surface supply dive.(See Table A-9,Appendix A.1.)6.2.2 Scope and Application of the Occupational Diving Regulations The regulators in each of the eight Canadian jurisdictions scanned for this report have general duty clauses in their governing statutes or subordinate regulations that require employers to provide workers with a safe work environment that is free of recognized hazards.Each jurisdiction also sets out additional parameters to clarify the scope and application of the occupational diving regulations.However,there are some significant differences in what the regulations apply to and what is excluded(see Table A-10,Appendix A.2).For example,Part 24 of British Columbias Occupational Health and Safety Regulation sets out that the occupational diving requirements apply to“all persons involved in any occupational diving operation”81,whereas Section 2 of Ontarios Diving Operations Regulation sets out that the regulations apply in relation to“any diving operation”and“any function in support of a diving operation”87.Section 2 of Ontarios regulation further clarifies that the regulations do not apply to“any diving operation in which the only underwater breathing equipment used is snorkelling equipment”,as well as recreational diving,recreational dive training,emergency response diving,or any function in support of these types of dives 87.Nova Scotias Occupational Diving Regulations similarly exclude dives“using only a snorkel”as well as scientific dives 88.Quebecs Regulation respecting occupational health and safety excludes the“teaching and practice of recreational diving”and police diving 82.Finally,the Canada Occupational Health and Safety Regulations exclude diving operations to which the oil and gas diving and offshore area petroleum diving regulations apply 84.6.2.3 Types of Occupational Diving RegulatedThe types of occupational diving that are regulated in each of the jurisdictions scanned for this report are shown in Table 4.Criteria for SCUBA and surface-supplied diving appear in the regulations of all eight jurisdictions,and all but the federal government provide criteria for deep diving.British Columbia is the sole jurisdiction with requirements for altitude diving.Of the types of diving regulated in Canada,only SCUBA and surface-supplied diving are used in the aquaculture industry.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE20csagroup.orgTable 4:Diving Techniques Covered under Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Regulations Diving TechniqueBCONQCNLNSNBPECASCUBA divingXXXXXXXXSurface supply/surface-supplied divingXXXXXXXXDeep divingXXXXXXXOne-atmosphere divingXXXXXXXDiving in contaminated environmentsXXXXXXAltitude divingX Indicates provinces that have incorporated by reference CSA Z275.2 in their regulations.6.2.4 Prohibitions on SCUBA DivingThe regulations in all of the jurisdictions scanned,except the federal government,prohibit the use of SCUBA for a combined total of 23 underwater activities performed during diving operations(see Table A-11,Appendix A.2).Fourteen of these activities29 are also prohibited in CSA Z275.2.Other than the two provinces(Newfoundland and Labrador,Prince Edward Island)that have incorporated by reference CSA Z275.2 in their diving regulations,no jurisdictions in Canada prohibit all of the activities listed in CSA Z275.2,but there is variation in the activities that are prohibited.All jurisdictions except the federal government prohibit the use of SCUBA for operations involving diving in a contaminated environment,and six jurisdictions(all but New Brunswick and the federal government)prohibit the use of SCUBA for operations involving welding,burning or cutting,and hoisting.Nova Scotia is the sole jurisdiction that sets out in regulation the permitted uses of SCUBA 88.Section 29 Diving operations involving underwater intakes;underwater exhausts;entry into pipes,tunnels,ducts,and confined spaces;working at a water control structure;welding;burning/cutting;high-pressure jetting;hoisting;dredging;use of power tools;planned diving beyond no-compression limit;diving in a contaminated environment;use or handling of explosives;liveboating;or water current of 1 knot or greater.87 of Nova Scotias Occupational Diving Regulations states that when certain conditions are met:“SCUBA is permitted to be used at non-construction underwater work sites,non-industrial underwater work sites and commercial seafood harvesting underwater work sites for(a)high-pressure jetting;(b)hoisting;(c)using power tools;(d)diving near underwater intakes more than 10 cm in diameter.SCUBA is permitted to be used at commercial seafood harvesting underwater work sites for(a)diving near underwater intakes less than 10 cm in diameter;or(b)diving near pipes less than 10 cm in diameter”88.The conditions that need to be met for SCUBA use are:(a)SCUBA diving is deemed to be integral to normal operations,(b)the employer has implemented“a written code of practice that includes the dive plan required by Section 20”of the regulations,and(c)the employer has obtained“written confirmation from the Director that the code of practice is acceptable to the Director”88.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE21csagroup.org6.2.5 Maximum Permitted Depths for SCUBA DivingThe regulations in six of the eight jurisdictions(all but Quebec and the federal government)explicitly state the maximum depth to which a SCUBA diver can dive(see Table A-12,Appendix A.2).The maximum depth prescribed and the unit of measure are not consistent across the country.Three jurisdictions(Newfoundland and Labrador,New Brunswick,Prince Edward Island)set the maximum depth at 30 metres,two jurisdictions(British Columbia,the federal government)set the maximum depth at 40 metres,and one jurisdiction(Ontario)sets the maximum depth at 100 feet.The regulations in two jurisdictions(Quebec,Nova Scotia)reference different depths,but do not explicitly state the maximum allowable depth for SCUBA diving.6.2.6 Minimum Equipment Requirements for SCUBA and Surface-Supplied DivingThe regulations in seven of the eight jurisdictions(all except the federal government)list minimum equipment requirements for SCUBA diving(see Table A-13,Appendix A.2).The way in which SCUBA apparatus is described varies across the country.For example,British Columbia requires“a SCUBA unit complete with a quick release harness and a submersible pressure gauge”81,whereas New Brunswick requires“an open-circuit demand apparatus with quick-release harness,a reserve device or a bail-out system”83.Other than the SCUBA apparatus,the only other pieces of equipment that all seven regulators explicitly require for SCUBA diving are a suitable wet/exposure suit or protective clothing,a weight belt with a quick-release buckle or closure,and a suitable knife.In all eight jurisdictions,the regulations list minimum equipment requirements for surface-supplied diving(see Table A-14,Appendix A.2).As with SCUBA,the way in which equipment requirements for surface-supplied diving are described varies across the country.For example,Ontario requires a diving helmet,full face mask,or hookah that is“fitted with an adequate non-return valve”and“attached by a hose to an adequate emergency bail-out system”87.Nova Scotia requires a“helmet or face mask that is all of the following:(a)adequate;(b)designed for its intended purpose;(c)fitted with a non-return valve;(d)fitted with an adequate locking or fastening device;(e)attached by a hose to the divers bail-out system”88.Other than the breathing apparatus,the only other piece of equipment that all regulators explicitly require for surface-supplied diving is a bailout system.6.2.7 CSA Diving Standards Referenced in RegulationAll eight of the jurisdictions reference CSA Z275.2 in their occupational diving regulations,but only five reference CSA Z275.4.However,the specific version of the referenced standards varies across jurisdictions.Three jurisdictions(British Columbia,New Brunswick and the federal government)reference the 1992 edition of CSA Z275.2,two(Newfoundland and Labrador,Nova Scotia)reference the 2004 edition,two(Ontario,Quebec)reference the 2011 edition,and one(Prince Edward Island)references the current edition,which was published in 2020.In terms of CSA Z275.4,one jurisdiction(British Columbia)references the 1997 edition,three(Quebec,Newfoundland and Labrador,Nova Scotia)reference the 2002 edition,and one(Ontario)references the 2012 edition.Three jurisdictions(New Brunswick,Prince Edward Island,the federal government)do not reference CSA Z275.4 at all.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE22csagroup.org7 Aquaculture-Specific Guide-lines and Codes of Practice7.1 Prince Edward Island Code of PracticeAt the time of writing,Prince Edward Island is the sole jurisdiction in Canada with an Aquaculture Safety Code of Practice,which was first published in 2008 and was updated in March 2023.The original version included a comprehensive chapter on diving safety that listed safe diving procedures and outlined additional requirements for occupational SCUBA diving for aquaculture,and the updated Code of Practice states that CSA Z275.2:20 provides the regulatory guidance for the OHS regulations,and that all diving operations done at aquaculture workplaces must meet the CSA standard 89.7.2 International Standards and Codes of PracticeAquaculture-specific guidelines to supplement jurisdictional occupational diving regulations were identified in the three international jurisdictions scanned for this report:the United Kingdom,Australia,and New Zealand.The guidelines,which are all fairly prescriptive,were prepared by each jurisdictions aquaculture industry,in consultation with the relevant regulator.7.2.1 United KingdomThe United Kingdoms Health and Safety Executive has published two guidance documents and an approved code of practice to supplement The Diving at Work Regulations 1997 90-93.Health and Safety on Floating Fish Farms:Thisdocument,which was published in 1997,providesguidance on how to design,construct and maintain,and safely use floating fish farm installations 91.It also summarizes key regulatory requirements,including the diving provisions.It states that“the useof diving as a routine activity needs to be kept to aminimum”and advises that alternative methods areavailable to check anchors,wash nets,and removedead fish or other debris.It also specifies that The Diving at Work Regulations 1997 apply to diving operations inside and outside cages and that the use of divers with“amateur or no qualifications”is prohibited.Commercial Shellfish Diving in Inshore Water:This document,which was first published in 1998 andupdated in 2021,provides guidance to those involvedin diving projects undertaken to collect shellfish forsale to a merchant or a customer 92.It includesinformation on approved qualifications for diving inthis sector,responsibilities of dive personnel,diveteam size,recommended equipment,dive methods,and specific hazards that may be encountered.BothSCUBA and surface-supplied diving are permitted,and the document stipulates that the risk assessmentshould identify the safety rationale for the selectedmethod,noting that the“equipment necessary toperform the dive safely and without risk to healthdepends on the type and location of the dive andshould be set out in the diving project plan”92.Itrecommends that,at a minimum,divers should carrythe following equipment:an independent secondarysource of breathing gas with a gauge that can be readby the diver,a means of providing positive buoyancyto float them on the surface while awaiting recovery,a submersible depth gauge,a timing device(or divecomputer),a suitable cutting tool,and a personallocation beacon or GPS tracking device 92.Approved Code of Practice(ACOP)forCommercial Diving Projects Inland/Inshore:This document,which was first published in 1998and updated in 2014,provides practical advice onwhat diving projects conducted in support of fishfarming must do to comply with The Diving at WorkRegulations 1997 93.The ACOP covers the followingtopics:responsibilities of diving contractors,divingproject plan and risk assessment,dive teamsand work practices,supervisors and divers,andmedical checks 93.For each topic,it sets out theregulatory language and explains the“preferred orrecommended”methods that can be used to complywith the diving regulations.It also provides guidanceASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE23csagroup.orgto help interpret the regulations and advice on how to achieve compliance.The Diving at Work Regulations 1997 require that the diving project plan be based on a risk assessment;the ACOP sets out that the diving contractor is responsible for the risk assessment and preparation of a diving plan.The ACOP states that the risk assessment should determine the diving methods and the required equipment,and that“diving using surface-supplied breathing apparatus is the preferred method of carrying out diving operations under this ACOP because it is considered to be the safest method of diving for the vast majority of diving operations covered”93.The ACOP also states that,at a minimum,divers should wear a full-face mask,carry an independent secondary source of breathing gas,be connected to the surface by a lifeline,and be provided with appropriate two-way communication 93.7.2.2 AustraliaThe Western Australia Aquaculture Industry Diving Guidelines were collaboratively developed in the early 2000s by the Western Australian Commercial Fishing Industry and the Aquaculture Council of Western Australia,with support and assistance from WorkSafe Western Australia 94.The objective of these guidelines was to assist those involved in the aquaculture industry to comply with OHS requirements and to develop and implement safe work procedures.The guidelines provide information on general diving procedures and equipment that applies to all diving operations,as well as responsibilities and procedures for SCUBA and surface-supplied diving.Topics covered under the section on general procedures and equipment include divers equipment,breathing air quality,dive organization and planning,communications,diving hand signals,hazard management,vessel diving,emergency equipment and emergency preparedness,formal record-keeping(diving records and company records),and accident procedures and reports.The guidelines also allow both SCUBA and surface-supplied diving,as long as they comply with AS/NZ 2299.1:1999,Occupational diving operations,Part 1:Standard operational practice 94.7.2.3 New ZealandTwo documents from New Zealand are relevant to this report:the New Zealand Aquaculture Industry Diving Good Practice Guidelines and WorkSafe New Zealands consultation paper,Proposed Changes to Occupational Diving Certificate of Competence Categories.New Zealand Aquaculture Industry Diving Good Practice Guidelines:This document,which was first published in 2004 and updated in 2018,is a subset of the joint AustraliaNew Zealand standard AS/NZS 2299,Occupational diving operations,Parts 1 and 2,and focuses on the aquaculture industry in New Zealand 95.It was developed by the New Zealand Aquaculture Industry Diving Working Group and provides information on preferred work practices and standards for occupational divers in the aquaculture industry.The guidelines apply to SCUBA diving and snorkelling,but do not apply to surface-supplied diving,construction diving on aquaculture farms,power tool use,or diving that involves prolonged“Diving using surface-supplied breathing apparatus is the preferred method of carrying out diving operations under this ACOP because it is considered to be the safest method of diving for the vast majority of diving operations covered.”ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE24csagroup.orgphysical exertion or requires decompression stops.The guidelines set out the scope of duties for general aquaculture diving,finfish farm diving,shellfish farm diving,and plant farm diving 95.Examples of general diving duties include searching,locating,and recovering or attaching a line to marine farm equipment;untangling ropes or lines;and attaching,replacing,repairing,and maintenance of items that are minor and routine in nature.Examples of finfish farm diving duties include recovering morts,and inspecting and repairing minor net rips or holes in a sea pen.The guidelines also provide information on applicable legislation,training and qualifications,dive team personnel,record-keeping,diving equipment and apparatus,emergency procedures,dive plans,and criteria for SCUBA and snorkel diving in aquaculture.Appendix 5 in the guidelines includes 20 task-specific standard operating procedures for diving in aquaculture,which cover a range of topics,including underwater inspection on marine farms,locating and attaching a line to a sunken line,attaching lifting rope to marine farm equipment for relocation,cleaning activities on marine farms,untangling ropes on marine farms or from boat propellors,recovering finfish morts in sea pens,inspecting and mending sea pen nets,scraping bio fouling from sea pen pontoons,installing airlifts for mort recovery in sea pens,and placing or removing weights from salmon nets 95.Each standard operating procedure provides a rationale for the activity;lists the standard SCUBA equipment to be used(as well as any task-specific equipment);and describes task-specific pre-dive requirements(i.e.,emergency procedure plan,minimum personnel requirements,hazard analysis,and dive plan),task-specific dive activities and special safety precautions,and post-dive requirements(i.e.,monitoring the diver after surfacing;debriefing about the job,any hazards encountered,and any variances to the dive plan;completion of the dive log;calculation of surface interval time needed if another dive is to be made;discussion of post-dive travel;washing and storing dive gear;and cautionary notes30)95.30 Example of a cautionary note:“Avoid hot showers and/or activities causing increased blood flow for a period post diving,as increased blood flow increases the risk of decompression sickness.”Proposed Changes to Occupational Diving Certificate of Competence Categories:This consultation paper,which was released by WorkSafe New Zealand in January 2023,proposed a new risk-based model for diving that accounts for the level of risk associated with the type of dive and the type of equipment used,and that recommends the level of qualifications required 96.Under the new model,aquaculture is assigned to General Diver Class C Common,which permits general diving to a depth of 30 metres.The level of risk depends on the types of activities performed.For aquaculture,risk ranges from low(farm inspection)to moderately high(mort collection)96.The deadline for submissions in response to the proposed changes was March 2023.At the time of writing,no changes to the diving certificate of competence regime have been implemented.7.3 How Aquaculture-Specific Guidelines and Codes of Practice CompareThis section presents a cross-jurisdictional comparison of key criteria found in the aquaculture-specific guidelines and codes of practice,and addresses the following key questions:What diving methods are permitted in aquaculture?When is SCUBA diving permitted in aquaculture?What tools and technologies are recommended?What skills and competencies are required for occupational divers in this sector?Summary tables detailing the four jurisdictions discussed in this section(Australia,New Zealand,Prince Edward Island,and the United Kingdom)are presented in Appendix A.3(Tables A-15 to A-18).Permitted Diving Methods:Occupational SCUBA diving is permitted in aquaculture in Australia,New Zealand,and Prince Edward Island.Surface-supplied diving is permitted in Australia and is the preferred method in the United Kingdom.However,although the United Kingdoms ACOP stresses that the safest ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE25csagroup.organd preferred method is surface-supplied diving,SCUBA diving may be permitted depending on the outcome of a risk assessment.Snorkelling is also permitted in New Zealand.(See Table A-15.)When SCUBA Diving is Permitted:Across the fourjurisdictions,the guidelines and codes of practiceidentify 17 circumstances in which SCUBA divingis permitted in aquaculture.However,there is littleconsistency in the criteria.For example,of thevarious criteria listed,only one is present in all of theguidelines or codes of practice:when the diver isqualified and medically fit.(See Table A-16.)Accepted or Recommended Tools andTechnologies:Across the four jurisdictions,theguidelines and codes of practice identify 19 tools andtechnologies that are accepted or recommended forSCUBA diving in aquaculture.The recommendedtools and technologies are moderately consistent.The only items required in all jurisdictions are a facemask,suitable knife/cutting tool,weight belt withquick-release closure,and an appropriate exposuresuit or protective clothing.A submersible depthgauge and a two-way communication device arerequired by three jurisdictions(although the fourth,New Zealand,does recommend the latter for certaintask-specific activities).(See Table A-17.)Required Skills and Competencies:Table A-18presents a high level overview of the competencyrequirements identified in the guidelines and codesof practice for SCUBA diving in aquaculture,as wellas the Canadian equivalencies listed in the UnitedKingdoms ACOP.The guidelines in all jurisdictionsexcept Australia state that evidence of competence isrequired.The United Kingdom is the only jurisdictionthat explicitly indicates recreational dive certificatesare not acceptable.31 Under-reporting(or under-claiming)occurs when workers or employers do not report eligible work-related injuries or illnesses to a workers compensation board.Under-reporting occurs for a variety of reasons,including lack of awareness,deliberate claims suppression,or use of alternative insurance policies.32 For example,agriculture is covered in British Columbia but not in Saskatchewan.8 Key Gaps,Challenges,and Opportunities8.1 Key Gaps and Challenges8.1.1 Underestimation of Work-Related Injury,Illness,and MortalityAlthough aquaculture is one of the fastest growing industries in Canada and around the world,the review of the scientific and grey literature showed that it is an understudied industry when it comes to OHS.Research conducted in Canada,Australia,and the European Union over the past two decades indicates that aquaculture has much higher rates of lost time injuries and illnesses relative to other industries,as well as a higher incidence of fatalities.Studies from Norway have also shown that divers in the aquaculture industry experience high risks of injury and mortality compared to divers in other industries 40,41.However,because the injury,fatality,and illness rates reported in the literature are based on workers compensation statistics,they likely under-represent actual injury and fatality rates in aquaculture 12,21,37,38,97.Factors that affect the accuracy,reliability,and jurisdictional comparability of workers compensation data include under-reporting31 of injuries,illnesses,or fatalities to a workers compensation board or commission;jurisdictional differences in whether the industry or workforce is covered;32 jurisdictional differences in how the industry and associated occupations are classified and coded;jurisdictional differences in how occupational injuries,illnesses,and fatalities are defined and recognized by legislation or policy;and jurisdictional differences in how injury and illness claims are tracked 13,14,21,37,97.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE26csagroup.orgThe following factors specifically affect the interpretation of workers compensation statistics for the aquaculture industry:There are inter-jurisdictional differences in how aquaculture is classified for workers compensation purposes.For example,in Canada,aquaculture may be classified as a subsector of the agriculture industry,primary resources,fishing,or a combination thereof.This is significant because it may not be possible to distinguish injuries,illnesses,and fatalities that specifically occur in aquaculture from those that occur at the broader sectoral level 12,44.Specialty occupations,such as diving,may be subcontracted to companies outside of the aquaculture industry 12,13,21,23,39,41.This is significant because diving-related injuries,illnesses,or fatalities that occur in aquaculture or seafood harvesting operations are not counted as having happened in aquaculture,but rather in the industry sector where the subcontractor is classified.As a result,the number of injuries,illnesses,and fatalities associated with diving in the aquaculture industry is underestimated.Compared to other industries,aquaculture has a high prevalence of self-employed,young workers,and precariously employed part-time or casual workers 12-14,17,21,38.This is significant because in many jurisdictions,self-employed workers are not fully covered and are likely under-represented in the workers compensation statistics.Furthermore,research shows that young workers and the precariously employed are less likely to submit claims,and as such,are under-represented in the statistics 12,13,98.8.1.2 Lack of Consistency in the Occupational Diving RegulationsDespite the presence of a relatively robust regulatory framework for occupational diving in Canada,the environmental scan identified a number of gaps and inconsistencies in how occupational diving is regulated.These differences are found in the terms that are defined,the way terms are defined,the topics covered,and even in the specifics of some of the criteria and requirements.Across the jurisdictions scanned for this report,there were inconsistencies in the scope and application of the diving regulations(i.e.,what was included vs.what was excluded),the prohibitions on using SCUBA diving for specific underwater activities,the maximum depths permitted for SCUBA diving,the minimum equipment requirements for both SCUBA and surface-supplied diving,and the editions of CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4 referenced in regulation.At present,only two jurisdictions in Canada(Prince Edward Island,Newfoundland and Labrador)have occupational diving regulations that completely align with CSA Group standards,as they are the only jurisdictions that have incorporated by reference CSA Z275.2 in their regulations.There are,however,differences in the editions referenced in each jurisdiction.Newfoundland and Labrador references the 2004 edition,whereas Prince Edward Island references the latest version(published in 2020).Variation in the specific version of the standard being referenced was not unique to these two jurisdictions.Across the eight Canadian jurisdictions that reference CSA Z275.2 in regulation,three reference the 1992 edition,two reference the 2004 edition,two reference the 2011 edition,and one references the 2020 edition.Of the five jurisdictions that reference CSA Z275.4,none reference the 2022 edition,one references the 1997 edition,three reference the 2002 edition,and one references the 2012 edition.Three jurisdictions do not reference CSA Z275.4 at all.8.1.3 Absence of Canadian Aquaculture-Specific Guidelines or Codes of PracticeAlthough the occupational diving regulations in Canada cover aquaculture,none of the regulators in Canada,with the exception of Prince Edward Island,have published aquaculture-specific guidelines or codes of practice to assist with interpretation of and compliance with the regulations.The Prince Edward Island Code of Practice provides useful information to employers ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE27csagroup.orgin aquaculture about their duties to comply with the OHS regulations and the diving requirements 89.It includes a brief chapter on diving that explicitly states CSA Z275.2:20 provides the regulatory guidance for occupational diving in aquaculture.It then summarizes key applicable requirements from the standard,including diving personnel qualifications,diver medical qualifications,diver training qualifications,diving records,general diver procedures,diving personnel(e.g.,standby diver),adherence to planned procedures,identification of work site,diving hazards,emergency services and contingency planning.In contrast to the New Zealand guidelines,the Prince Edward Island Code of Practice does not provide task-specific standard operating procedures.Several key informants noted that while company-specific safe diving procedures exist,they are proprietary and not available in the public domain.The absence of publicly available aquaculture-specific guidelines or codes of practice,with task-specific guidance,is a major gap that could be addressed by a standardization solution.8.2 Opportunities for StandardizationA key motivator for this research was the prohibition in CSA Z275.2 on SCUBA and restricted surface-supplied diving during operations that involve hoisting.As noted in Section 5,this prohibition has been flagged by representatives of the aquaculture industry as a potential barrier to their adoption of CSA Z275.2 because the brailing of fish(i.e.,hoisting fish using a brail net)is an important activity in the aquaculture industry.Key informants indicated that there would be value in a standardization solution for aquaculture and seafood harvesting in Canada,which would allow for harmonization of occupational diving requirements across the country,as well as the creation of industry-and task-specific guidance.Two principal options emerged:(a)development of a new standalone standard for diving in aquaculture or(b)amendment of CSA Z275.2.8.2.1 A Standalone Standard for Diving in Aquaculture and Seafood HarvestingSome of the key informants suggested the development of a new standalone standard for diving in aquaculture and seafood harvesting.Based on the outcome of the environmental scan and the key informant interviews,such a standard could help:Resolve inconsistency in the terms that are defined and their definitions.Clarify the scope of practice.The New Zealand guidelines include a description of both general and specific scopes of practice(e.g.,finfish diving),and could serve as a valuable starting point.Clarify accepted diving methods.As highlighted in Section 7,occupational SCUBA diving is permitted in aquaculture in some jurisdictions(i.e.,Australia,New Zealand,and Prince Edward Island).While surface-supplied diving is the preferred method in the United Kingdom,SCUBA diving may be permitted depending on the outcome of a risk assessment(which must identify the safety reasons for the selected method).Develop clear guidance on how to perform a hazard and risk assessment.Although the CSA diving standards and the occupational diving regulations reference the need for such assessments to be performed,no comprehensive guidance is currently available in Canada or internationally.One area that would benefit from clearer guidance is the question of what constitutes a contaminated environment.For example,would a regulator or interested party consider clearing fish morts diving in a contaminated environment?If so,providing guidance on how to assess the risk,how to evaluate the risk,and how to mitigate the risk would benefit the industry.8.2.2 Amendment of CSA Z275.2Several of the key informants and some members of the Research Advisory Panel suggested amending CSA Z275.2 as an alternative to developing a standalone standard.Potential amendments include:ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE28csagroup.orgAllowing an exception during operations thatinvolve hoisting.Some key informants suggestedthat because CSA Z275.2 already allows certainexceptions33,clauses 7.1.4 and 8.1.2 could be amendedto allow an exception for SCUBA and restrictedsurface-supplied diving during operations thatinvolve hoisting.Creating a new section on diving in aquacultureand seafood harvesting within CSA Z275.2.Another suggested approach was to create a newsection within CSA Z275.2 that specifically addressesdiving in aquaculture and seafood harvesting.Thissection could not only incorporate the exceptiondescribed above,but could also address the issuesidentified in Section 8.2.1.8.2.3 An Informative Annex for AquacultureRegardless of whether a standardization solution is implemented for this industry,key informants also indicated there was value in the development and inclusion of an informative annex to CSA Z275.2 with guidelines for aquaculture diving.These guidelines could be structured to include the kind of information found in the standard operating procedures appended to the New Zealand guidelines.For example,the annex could list the standard SCUBA diving equipment that is to be used(as well as any task-specific equipment);describe pre-dive requirements(i.e.,emergency procedure plan,minimum personnel requirements,hazard analysis,and dive plan),dive activities and special safety precautions,and post-dive requirements(i.e.,monitoring the diver after surfacing;debriefing about the job,any hazards encountered,and any variances to the dive plan;completion of the dive log;calculation of surface interval time needed if another dive is to be made;discussion of post-dive travel;washing and storing dive gear);and provide cautionary notes.If a standalone standard were created,the informative annex should be structured in a way that provides information for each specific diving task performed in aquaculture or seafood harvesting.33 Subsections(h)and(i)of Clause 7.1.4 make exceptions to allow for SCUBA diving in operations that involve a contaminated environment and the use or handling of explosives.9 ConclusionsThe rapid growth of aquaculture in Canada and around the world,coupled with the decline in offshore oil and gas-related occupational diving,has led to many divers migrating to the aquaculture and seafood harvesting industry.With this influx of workers,there is a need to understand whether Canadas current occupational diving regulatory framework and voluntary occupational diving standards are meeting the needs of the sector.The objective of this research was to determine which diving methods are appropriate for aquaculture,which tools and technologies are acceptable,and which skills and competencies occupational divers must possess to perform aquaculture and seafood harvesting jobs safely.The findings revealed that OHS in aquaculture is understudied.Research conducted in Australia,Norway,and Canada shows that compared to other industries,aquaculture has high rates of lost time injuries and illnesses and a high incidence of fatalities.Divers in this sector experience high risks of injury and mortality compared to divers in other industries.However,due to limitations in workers compensation data and reporting rates,it is likely that the actual injury and fatality rates in aquaculture are under-represented.Specific factors that complicate the interpretation of workers compensation statistics for the aquaculture industry include:Inter-jurisdictional differences in how aquaculture isclassified for workers compensation purposes;Specialty occupations,such as diving,may besubcontracted to companies outside of the sector,which shifts the burden of injuries and fatalities fromaquaculture to elsewhere;andAquaculture has a high prevalence of self-employed,young,and precariously employed part-time orcasual workers,which are all categories of workerswho are less likely to report an injury and aretherefore more likely to be under-represented in thestatistics.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE29csagroup.orgDespite the presence of a relatively robust regulatory framework in Canada,the environmental scan identified a number of gaps and inconsistencies in the occupational diving regulations across the country.There is also a lack of alignment between some of the regulations and the current versions of CSA Z275.2 and CSA Z275.4,so it is reasonable to conclude that the needs and requirements for divers in the aquaculture and seafood harvesting sectors may not be sufficiently addressed.One of the main gaps is the lack of aquaculture-specific guidelines or codes of practice to assist with interpretation of and compliance with existing regulations.Key informants indicated that there would be value in a standardization solution for aquaculture and seafood harvesting because it would allow for harmonization of occupational diving requirements across the country,as well as the creation of industry-and task-specific guidance.The two solutions that emerged included the development of a new standalone standard or the amendment of CSA Z275.2 to address the unique aspects of diving in the aquaculture and seafood harvesting industry.The preferred and more pragmatic approach recommended by some members of the Research Advisory Panel is to create a new section on aquaculture and seafood harvesting within CSA Z275.2.Not only would this address key issues identified in the literature review and environmental scan to ensure CSA Z275.2 is reflective of the needs of aquaculture and seafood harvesting,but it would also align with CSA Groups strategic priority to reduce the number of Z275 standards,and it would use existing CSA Z275 Technical Committee resources.Key informants also indicated that there would be value in the development and inclusion of an informative annex to CSA Z275.2 with guidelines for aquaculture diving.These guidelines should outline preferred or recommended methods that aquaculture employers can use that align with the diving regulations,and provide guidance to help interpret and achieve compliance with the regulations.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE30csagroup.orgReferences1Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.“Aquaculture.”https:/www.fao.org/fishery/en/aquaculture(accessed January 15,2023).2National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.“What is Aquaculture?”https:/www.noaa.gov/stories/what-is-aquaculture(accessed February 22,2023).3Aquaculture Stewardship Council.“What is Aquaculture?”https:/www.asc-aqua.org/aquaculture-explained/why-is-aquaculture-important/what-is-aquaculture/(accessed February 22,2023).4Fisheries and Oceans Canada.“Farmed Species Profiles.”https:/www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/sector-secteur/species-especes/index-eng.htm(accessed February 22,2023).5Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,“The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture.Towards Blue Transformation,”FAO,Rome,IT,2022.Online.Available:https:/www.fao.org/documents/card/en/c/cc0461en6Fisheries and Oceans Canada.“Aquaculture Production Quantities and Value.”https:/www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/stats/aqua/aqua-prod-eng.htm(accessed February 22,2023).7Statistics Canada.“Table 32-10-0107-01.Aquaculture,Production and Value.”https:/www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3210010701&pickMembers0=1.1&pickMembers1=2.1&cubeTimeFrame.startYear=1991&cubeTimeFrame endYear=2021&referencePeriods=19910101,20210101(accessed February 23,2023).8Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance,“The State of Farmed Seafood in Canada 2020,”CanadianAquaculture Industry Alliance,Ottawa,ON,2021.Online.Available:https:/ and Oceans Canada.“Communities and Employment.Revitalizing Coastal,Rural and AboriginalCommunities.”https:/www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/sector-secteur/commun/index-eng.htm(accessedFebruary 22,2023).10Gardner Pinfold Consultants Inc.,“Socio-Economic Impact of Aquaculture in Canada.2013 Edition.ForFisheries and Oceans Canada Aquaculture Management Directorate,”February 2013.Online.Available:https:/www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/sector-secteur/socio/index-eng.htm11Fisheries and Oceans Canada,“Outlook to 2027 for Canadian Fish and Seafood,”2018.Online.Available:https:/www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/ea-ae/economic-analysis/outlook-to-2027-perspectives-jusqu-en-2027-eng.html12L.Cavalli et al.,“Scoping Global Aquaculture Occupational Safety and Health,”Journal of Agromedicine,vol.24,no.4,pp.391-404,2019,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2019.1655203.13B.Neis and C.Knott,“Aquaculture Occupational Health and Safety.Canada Profile.,”Ocean Frontier Instituteand SafetyNet Centre for Occupational Health and Safety Research,St.Johns NL,2019.Online.Available:https:/coastalfutures.ca/projects/ohs-country-profile/ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE31csagroup.org14 D.Ngajilo and M.F.Jeebhay,“Occupational Injuries and Diseases in Aquaculture A Review of Literature,”Aquaculture,vol.507,pp.40-55,2019,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2019.03.053.15 A.Watterson,“European Region Profile on Aquaculture Occupational Health and Safety for FAO,”2018.Online.Available:https:/doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.23415.0656416 A.Watterson,“UK National Aquaculture Occupational Health and Safety Profile for FAO,”2019.Online.Available:https:/doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.30125.9520917 A.Watterson,M.F.Jeebhay,B.Neis,R.Mitchell,and L.Cavalli,“The Neglected Millions:The Global State of Aquaculture Workers Occupational Safety,Health and Well-Being,”Occup Environ Med,vol.77,no.1,pp.15-18,2020,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2019-105753.18 A.Martin,“Risk Factors Associated with Severe Injuries in Inland Aquaculture Farms,”MPH Capstone Project,College of Public Health,University of Kentucky,Lexington,KY,2016.Online.Available:https:/uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1108&context=cph_etds19 D.W.Cole et al.,“Aquaculture:Environmental,Toxicological,and Health Issues,”Int J Hyg Env Health,vol.212,no.4,pp.369-377,2009,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2008.08.003.20 D.T.R.Moreau and B.Neis,“Occupational Health and Safety Hazards in Atlantic Canadian Aquaculture:Laying the Groundwork for Prevention,”Marine Policy,vol.33,no.2,pp.401-411,2009,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2008.09.001.21 C.Ochs,B.Neis,K.Cullen,and E.J.McGuinness,“Occupational Safety and Health in Marine Aquaculture in Atlantic Canada:What Can Be Learned From an Analysis of Provincial Occupational Injury Compensation Claims Data?,”Aquaculture,vol.540,p.736680,2021,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.736680.22 I.M.Holmen,I.B.Utne,S.Haugen,and I.Ratvik,“The Status of Risk Assessments in Norwegian Fish Farming,”Safety and Reliability.Theory and Applications M.Cepin and R.Bris,Eds.,London,UK:CRC Press,2017,pp.1457-65.23 I.M.Holmen and T.Thorvaldsen,“Occupational Health And Safety in Norwegian Aquaculture-National Profile for a FAO Report on Global Aquaculture OHS,”SINTEF Ocean,Trondheim,Norway,2018.Online.Available:https:/sintef.brage.unit.no/sintef-xmlui/handle/11250/250065224 I.M.Holmen,I.B.Utne,and S.Haugen,“Identification of Safety Indicators in Aquaculture Operations Based on Fish Escape Report Data,”Aquaculture,vol.544,p.737143,2021,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737143.25 I.M.Holmen,I.B.Utne,and S.Haugen,“Risk Assessments in the Norwegian Aquaculture Industry:Status and Improved Practice,”Aquacultural Engineering,vol.83,pp.65-75,2018,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2018.09.002.26 M.L.Myers,“Review of Occupational Hazards Associated with Aquaculture,”Journal of Agromedicine,vol.15,no.4,pp.412-426,2010,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2010.512854.27 J.P.Fry,C.A.Ceryes,J.M.Voorhees,N.A.Barnes,D.C.Love,and M.E.Barnes,“Occupational Safety and Health in U.S.Aquaculture:A Review,”Journal of Agromedicine,vol.24,no.4,pp.405-423,2019,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2019.1639574.ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE32csagroup.org28 R.W.Byard,“Commercial Fishing Industry Deaths Forensic issues,”Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine,vol.20,no.3,pp.129-132,2013/04/01/2013,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2012.05.010.29 D.Smart and P.McCartney,“High Risk Diving-Tasmanias Aquaculture Industry,”SPUMS J,vol.20,no.3,pp.159-165,July-September 1990.Online.Available:https:/ D.J.Doolette and D.F.Gorman,“Evaluation of Decompression Safety in an Occupational Diving Group Using Self Reported Diving Exposure and Health Status,”Occupational and Environmental Medicine,vol.60,no.6,pp.418-422,2003,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1136/oem.60.6.418.31 J.D.Douglas and A.H.Milne,“Decompression Sickness in Fish Farm Workers:a New Occupational Hazard,”BMJ,vol.302,no.6787,pp.1244-5,1991,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1136/bmj.302.6787.1244-a.32 D.Smart,“Back to the Future:Occupational Diver Training in Australia,”Diving Hyperb Med,vol.47,no.4,pp.214-215,2017,doi:https:/doi.org/10.28920/dhm47.4.214-215.33 V.Flook,“Yo-Yo Diving and the Risk of Decompression Illness.Research Report 214,”Health and Safety Executive,2004.Online.Available:https:/www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrhtm/rr214.htm34 K.Turner,“Occupational Injuries of Aquaculture Workers in Washington State,”MPH Thesis,Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences,University of Washington,Seattle,WA,2017.35.Irgens,K.Troland,R.Djurhuus,and M.Grnning,“Diving Exposure and Health Effects in Divers Working in Different Areas of Professional Diving,”International Maritime Health,vol.67,no.4,pp.235-242,2016,doi:https:/doi.org/10.5603/imh.2016.0042.36.Irgens,K.Troland,E.Thorsen,and M.Grnning,“Mortality Among Professional Divers in Norway,”Occup Med,vol.63,no.8,pp.537-43,2013,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqt112.37 K.O.Kaustell,T.E.A.Mattila,A.Ahvonen,and R.H.Rautiainen,“Occupational Injuries and Diseases in Fish Farming in Finland 19962015,”International Maritime Health,vol.70,no.1,pp.47-54,2019,doi:https:/doi.org/10.5603/imh.2019.0007.38 R.J.Mitchell and R.P.Lystad,“Occupational Injury And Disease in the Australian Aquaculture Industry,”Marine Policy,vol.99,pp.216-222,2019,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.10.044.39 S.M.Holen,X.Yang,I.B.Utne,and S.Haugen,“Major Accidents in Norwegian Fish Farming,”Safety Science,vol.120,pp.32-43,2019,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.05.036.40 S.M.Holen,I.B.Utne,I.M.Holmen,and H.Aasjord,“Occupational Safety in Aquaculture Part 1:Injuries in Norway,”Marine Policy,vol.96,pp.184-192,2018,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.08.009.41 S.M.Holen,I.B.Utne,I.M.Holmen,and H.Aasjord,“Occupational Safety in Aquaculture Part 2:Fatalities in Norway 19822015,”Marine Policy,vol.96,pp.193-199,2018,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.08.005.42 M.Myers and R.Durborow,“Aquacultural Safety and Health,”Health and Environment in Aquaculture,C.Edmir Daniel,D.Gianmarco Silva,and J.S.Reinaldo,Eds.,Rijeka:IntechOpen,2012.Online.Available:https:/doi.org/10.5772/29258ASSESSING THE NEEDS,GAPS,AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR OCCUPATIONAL DIVING IN AQUACULTURE33csagroup.org43 W.Gao and B.Neis,“Marine Aquaculture Health and Safety Regulation in Canada:Inspection Outcomes and Health and Safety Options in Provincial Regulations,”presented at the Aquaculture Canada and WAS North America St.Johns,Newfoundland and Labrador,2022.Online.Available:https:/ 44 K.Turner,P.Rabinowitz,N.Anderson,M.Cohen,and M.Pappaioanou,“Occupational Injuries of Aquaculture Workers:Washington State,”Journal of Agromedicine,vol.23,no.4,pp.336-346,2018,doi:https:/doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2018.1501452.45 J.P.Fry,D.C.Love,A.Shukla,and R.M.Lee,“Offshore Finfish Aquaculture in the United States:An Examination of Federal Laws that could be used to Address Environmental and Occupational Public Health Risks,”Int J Environ Res Public Health,vol.11,no.11,pp.11964-85,2014,doi:https:/doi.org/10.3390/ijerph111111964.46 T.Grant,“Were not Seeing the Truth:Inside the Hidden
2024-11-19
55页
5星级
Agricultural Policy Monitoring andEvaluation 2024INNOVATION FORSUSTAINABLE PRODUCTIVITY GROWTHAgricu.
2024-11-15
660页
5星级
罗兰贝格：预见2026：中国行业趋势报告（90页）.pdf
智源研究院：2026十大AI技术趋势报告（34页）.pdf
中国互联网协会：智能体应用发展报告（2025）（124页）.pdf
三个皮匠报告：2025银发经济生态：中国与全球实践白皮书（150页）.pdf
三个皮匠报告：2025中国商业航天市场洞察报告-中国商业航天新格局全景洞察（25页）.pdf
国声智库：全球AI创造力发展报告2025（77页）.pdf
三个皮匠报告：2025中国情绪消费市场洞察报告（24页）.pdf
中国电子技术标准化研究院：2025知识图谱与大模型融合实践案例集（354页）.pdf
艺恩：2026“情绪疗愈”消费市场趋势盘点报告（31页）.pdf
三个皮匠报告：2025中国固态电池市场洞察报告-产业爆发前夕如何重塑锂电新格局（26页）.pdf
0731-84720580
商务合作：really158d
友链申请 (QQ)：1737380874
最新报告
中英对照
全文搜索
报告精选
PDF上传翻译
多格式文档互转
入驻&报告售卖
会员权益
机构报告
券商研报
财报库
专题合集
英文报告
数据图表
会议报告
其他资源
研报
新质生产力
DeepSeek
低空经济
大模型
AI Agent
AI Infra
具身智能
自动驾驶
宠物
银发经济
人形机器人
企业出海
算力
微短剧
薪酬
白皮书
创新药
行业分析
个股研究
年报财报
IPO招股书
会议纪要
宏观策略
政策法规
其他
人工智能
信息科技
互联网
消费经济
汽车交通
电商零售
传媒娱乐
医疗健康
投资金融
能源环境
地产建筑
传统产业
英文报告
其它
行业聚焦
芯片产业
热点概念
全球咨询智库
人工智能
500强
新质生产力
会议峰会
新能源汽车
企业年报
互联网
公司研究
行业综观
消费教育
科技通信
医药健康
人力资源
投资金融
汽车产业
物流地产
电子商务
传统产业
传媒营销
其它
十五五规划系列报告合集（共48套打包）
2026低空经济/低空产业报告合集（共47套打包）
AI、科技与通信
广告、传媒与营销
消费、零售与支付
HR、文化与旅游
金融、保险与投资
能源、环境与工业
医疗制药与大健康
物流、地产与建筑
其他行业
AI ▪ 科技 ▪ 通信
数字化
金融财经
智能制造
电商传媒
地产建筑
医疗医学
能源化工
其他行业
收藏
下载
2026-02-02
AI查数
行业数据
政策法规
商业模式
产业链
竞争格局
市场规模
产业概述
其它
2026年
AI读财报
年报
一季报
半年报
三季报
IPO招股书
社会责任报告
A股
IPO申报
港股
美股&全球
新三板
微信扫码登录
手机快捷登录
账号登录
