Canadian farm gender pay gap still wide but narrowing

Dec 12, 2023

Recent study shows decreasing gender wage disparity among Canada’s farm operators

The gender pay gap among farm operators has been steadily decreasing over the past two decades. It still needs a long way to go, but at least it is headed in the right direction.

A recent Agriculture–Population Linkage study from Statistics Canada, which combines data from the Census of Agriculture and the Census of Population, highlights the trend. In 2020, the gap was nearly equal to the national average for all Canadians aged 16 and over.

This shrinking gap is notable in an industry where women’s earnings were traditionally much lower compared to men’s. The formula used to calculate this gap considers wages, salaries, and commissions, excluding farm operators who do not receive such payments.

It’s important to note that the study didn’t account for unpaid activities like child rearing, which could affect annual earnings.

By 2020, the gap had reduced, with women farm operators earning 28.4% less on average than their male counterparts, an improvement from the 35.2% gap in 2000. This trend mirrors the decrease in the overall Canadian gender pay gap.

The study also reveals that the gap is smaller among farm operators who work exclusively on the farm (20.4%), compared to those who work both on and off the farm (32.1%). Geographical variations are evident too, with the smallest gap in the Atlantic provinces (12.9%) and the largest in British Columbia (37.7%).

Different farm types also show varying gaps, with the smallest gap in dairy cattle and milk farms (5.7%), and the largest in greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture farms (38.3%). Similarly, revenue class plays a role, with smaller gaps in higher revenue farms.

Education level impacts the gap too, with the smallest gap among those holding a university certificate or diploma below bachelor level.

Interestingly, over one-quarter of women farm operators held a bachelor's level credential or above, higher than their male counterparts.

Field of study is another factor, with the smallest gap among those in agriculture-related fields. Surprisingly, women in business-related programs faced a larger gap.

Additionally, the gap varies among different racial groups, being smaller among racialized farm operators (20.2%) compared to Indigenous operators (38.8%). Lastly, the gap is smaller in rural areas compared to population centres, although overall earnings are higher in the latter.

This study's findings are a positive indication of the narrowing gender pay gap in Canadian agriculture, reflecting ongoing efforts towards achieving wage equality in the sector. But we still have a long way to go.

Video: The 15-Year Bet Behind Every New Variety!

Canada is trying to decide how much agricultural research capacity it can afford to lose. Brian Rossnagel believes the better question is whether the country can afford to rebuild it.

The longtime barley and oat breeder makes the case with a simple fact about his profession: the consequences of today’s decisions may not become visible for 10 or 15 years.

“Pick the right parents. That’s the biggest thing,” Rossnagel says. “If you pick the wrong parents, you’re not going to get anywhere—and you don’t know that until 10 years, 15 years later.”

That warning carries particular weight as Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada moves to reduce spending and streamline parts of its science operations. The department’s 2026–27 plan anticipates the loss of approximately 665 positions by 2028–29 and says some research will be reduced where capacity exists in academia or industry. AAFC says the changes will make its science operations more cost-effective over the long term.

For Canada’s seed industry, Rossnagel’s career illustrates what is at stake.

This fall, the retired University of Saskatchewan breeder will be inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame. During his 35-year career at the Crop Development Centre, he helped develop more than 100 barley and oat varieties, including CDC Austenson—one of Western Canada’s most widely grown feed barleys. His induction recognizes not only those varieties, but the collaboration and research system that made them possible.

Rossnagel is quick to emphasize that none of it was the work of one person.

“The first thing I thought about was all the other people who contributed to whatever success I and my program had over the years,” he says. “We know that it’s not an individual who does this. It’s a group—a team.”

That team extends well beyond the breeder whose name appears beside a variety. It includes technicians, pathologists, quality specialists, statisticians, regional testing sites, seed growers and industry partners. It also includes the breeders who came before and those who will carry the germplasm forward.

CDC Fraser barley, for example, moved through three breeding careers. Its parents came from Brian Harvey’s program. Rossnagel advanced the material after Harvey retired, and Aaron Beattie later guided it through registration and release.

That kind of handoff is normal in plant breeding. The person who makes the original cross may never see the resulting variety reach farmers.

It also explains why lost research capacity cannot simply be switched back on when budgets improve.

“If you shut it off, it’s very, very difficult—and particularly costly—to start it up again,” Rossnagel says. “If you have to start from scratch, it’s going to be at least 10 years before anybody notices whether you’re getting anything done or not.”

The concern is not simply how many experimental lines Canada can process. Modern equipment, statistical tools and genetic technologies allow today’s breeding programs to evaluate tens of thousands of lines—far more than Rossnagel could handle when he entered the field in the early 1970s.

But efficiency and automation do not generate every idea.

“If you pare back down, and instead of having six or seven individual scientists concentrating on wheat breeding, you go down and say three people could handle all this, well, that’s half the ideas gone,” he says. “Particularly if you happen to lose the three people who had the really neat and innovative ideas, boy, that’s a problem.”

It is a timely distinction for Canadian agriculture. Consolidating programs may preserve the volume of material moving through a system, at least initially. It may not preserve the diversity of thinking, regional knowledge or willingness to pursue unconventional crosses.

That regional knowledge matters because Canadian agriculture is not one uniform production environment. A variety suited to southern Alberta may face different disease, moisture and maturity pressures than one grown in Manitoba, Ontario or Atlantic Canada.

“Agriculture is applied biology,” Rossnagel says. “Biology, all around the Earth, moves from the poles to the equator. It does not move from Newfoundland to B.C. like politics do.”