The Benefits and Costs of Zero Tillage RD&E on the Canadian Prairies Lana Awada 19 th ICABR Conference June 17, 2015 Department of Bioresource PBE University of Saskatchewan

 Achieving food security is a significant and increasing challenge as the world population continues to grow proportionally  Global population increases by about 80 million people per year and it is expected to reach about 9.1 billion by the year of 2050  The existing capacity to satisfy food demand for the growing population remains uncertain, because of land degradation (U.N. 2002) Introduction  Agricultural production must increase by 70% by 2050 (The World Bank, 2012)

Figure 1. Global Land Degradation Source: UN, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), 2011  Land Degradation negatively impact crop production through losses in nutrients, water-storage capacity, and soil organic matter (SOM) Water 2%

Figure 2. The Canadian Prairies SOM 2% SOM 4% SOM 7% SOM 1%-10%  Land degradation on the Prairies has been recognized as problem by scientists for more than a century Soil erosion (wind, water, and tillage erosion) Soil organic matter depletion Soil salinity  Prairie Arable land 32 Mha

Land Degradation on the Prairies  In the 1930s, the Prairies experienced a period of severe drought and a number of dust storms: Dirty Thirties or Dust Bowl  High winds moved millions of tonnes of topsoil from fields, resulting in soil degradation Dust BowlSoil Erosion

 The major cause of land degradation is traditional/conventional tillage combined with the predominant practice of summerfallow  Traditional tillage requires multiple cultivations for weed control during the summerfallow season and for seedbed preparation Cause of Land Degradation

Conservation Tillage (CT)  CT is defined as a sustainable crop production system that Leaves at least 30% of crop residue on the soil surface after crop planting to protect soil from erosion Uses specialized seeding equipment to place seed and fertilizer in the soil with minimal disturbance Controls weeds by herbicides or by minimal cultivation and herbicides Uses crop rotations to break the life cycles of pests and diseases and help in controlling weeds  The alternative to traditional tillage – conservation tillage (CT) Minimum or mulch tillage Zero tillage CT is an innovation package: new management practice; herbicide; seeding equipment; and crop varieties

 The development of CT involved farmers, engineers, scientists, and farmer organisations who formally and informally worked together for a period of more than five decades  By the end of the 1970s, CT started to take shape on the Prairies In 1974, Monsanto Company introduced Roundup, but at a very high price Between the 1970s and 1980s, introduction of new varieties of oilseeds and pulses that can use in rotation with cereal and replace summerfallow The introduction of CT seeding equipment: e.g., Haybuster 1206 grain and fertilizer drill and Versatile Noble 2000 seed drill The Development of CT on the Prairies

 For a number of economic, technical, political and social factors, the adoption of CT did not occur on any major scale before the 1990s Saskatchewan farm implement developed and manufactured of air-seeders The price of herbicide Roundup went down The price of fuel went up It was well established that CT systems resolved the many shortcomings of TT The Adoption of CT on the Prairies

Air Seeder

Table 1: RD&E Expenditure on Zero Tillage Projects ($2014)

Figure 3. Tillage Systems Trends in the Canadian Prairies ( )  Today, more than 75% of the Prairie’s cropland is under some form of CT with more than 60% under ZT

Objectives  Estimate the benefits of ZT adoption  Use benefit cost analysis to evaluate the returns to public and private investments in zero tillage RD&E

The Benefits of ZT Adoption ZT Benefits Onsite Benefits of ZT Offsite Benefits of ZT Short-run Long-run

The Onsite Benefits of ZT Adoption Machinery Operations Labour Cost Fuel Cost Yield increase Summerfallow Herbicide Short Term Impact Water use Efficiency Machinery Cost Herbicide Cost

Figure 4. Trends in Agricultural Land Use on the Canadian Prairies 1991–2011

Soil quality Soil Organic matter (Nitrogen) Soil erosion Soil Salinity Long Term Benefits The Onsite Benefits of ZT Adoption

Figure 5. Soil Erosion Risk on the Canadian Prairies (1981–2006)

Figure 6. Soil Salinization Risk on the Canadian Prairies (1981–2006)

Figure 7. Soil Organic Carbon Change on the Canadian Prairies (1981–2006)

Offsite Benefits of ZT Adoption  Reduce Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 ): Reduction in soil organic carbon oxidation caused by the disturbance of soils (The low soil disturbance, ZT, has carbon sequestration potential through storing the organic matter in the soil) Reduction in carbon oxidation generated from machinery operations to prepare land for cropping  Reduce Nitrous Oxide (N 2 O) The deep banding of N fertilizer under ZT improves fertilizer use efficiency and reduces gaseous N losses, which in turn reduces N 2 O emissions into the atmosphere

 Prairie Crop Energy Model (PCEM): divide Prairies arable land into 22 districts  In each district land is allocated to 122 cropping activities  The model develops a production vector that defines crop yield, input use and environmental outcomes Quantify ZT Benefits

Table 2. BENEFITS FROM ZERO TILLAGE ADOPTION ON THE PRAIRIES Variables Alberta SaskatchewanManitobaTotal Prairies%

ESTIMATES OF BENEFIT / COST OF ZERO TILLAGE RD&E  Employing a counterfactual framework Assume in the absence of RD&E investments, the development of ZT technology would have occurred, but would have been delayed by five years This delay would reduce the benefit received from adoption This counterfactual forgone benefit is used as a proxy for the benefit from RD&E investments in ZT projects

Table Present Value of Benefits from Zero Tillage RD&E Prairies

Table 4. Benefit Cost Ratios for Zero Tillage RD&E  The return to ZT research is the highest payback for any agricultural R&D on the Prairies

Conclusion  The results show that total estimated benefits derived from the adoption of ZT are equal to $24.4 billion: $23.4 billion worth of onsite benefits and $997 million worth of offsite benefits  These large onsite benefits help explain the increased incentive of famers to adopt ZT on the Prairies  The high benefits of ZT provide farmers with opportunities to gain a competitive advantage in local and international markets by producing high yielding crop varieties at lower costs, while improving the environmental sustainability of agriculture  Although the offsite benefits are not currently recognized by the market place the contribution of ZT in the reduction of GHG emissions will help Canada meet its commitment under the Copenhagen Accord to reduce GHG emissions by 17% from 2005 levels by 2020

 The return to the agricultural sector is $109 on every $1 invested in research by the public sector  The return to the agricultural sector is $61 on every $1 invested in research by the public and private sectors  Farmers capture most of the ZT research benefits  Our findings of very high rates of return highlight the need to introduce policies that will support and foster sustainable innovation in complex farming systems Conclusion

Questions Thank You

 The future vitality of the ZT system depends on the ability to solve problems of continual evolution of agro-ecological issues  Future research examining the returns might examine the distributional impacts of ZT R&D on the private sector input suppliers, including machinery, fuel, chemical, and seed suppliers  As the adoption of ZT has freed up labour time for use elsewhere, future research might examine the impact of ZT in generating off-farm benefits for farmers Future Research

Factors Affecting the Adoption of Zero Tillage on the Prairies significantly and positively influence the adoption of ZT  Results of empirical work indicated (Awada, 2012): neighbourhood effect fuel/Glyphosate price ratio education farm ownership Large farm size high soil erosion risk class Humid soil type Short distance to research station Provincial dummy Time dummy age off-farm employment found to be insignificant