We make lots of specific recommendations to that effect in our document. We need to rethink many of the agricultural support programs that are currently in place that incentivize synthetic pesticide use in agriculture. I'll give you one example: crop insurance programs. You can only qualify for crop insurance if you demonstrate a certain level of agricultural inputs and if you grow a large-scale monoculture. If you want to switch to more diversified agriculture, crop rotations, for example, you would not qualify for certain crop insurance programs. We know, and the importance of France has demonstrated, that insurance-wise it costs less in the long term if you have diverse crops, and crop rotation as well, to ensure that production. Crop insurance is a very easy tool.
The other thing that we hear routinely, and I'm sure you've heard it in your committee, is that a lot of the innovation and the tools that are developed to reduce pesticide use are developed by agricultural producers. There is an innovation market failure in that agricultural producers often cannot reap the benefits of that innovation because they can't patent their practices, they can't apply for intellectual property rights. We need the financing, the research and development funding, to go to the producers to innovate and to share peer-to-peer best practices for reducing pesticide use.