There are two parts to the vision.
One is largely related to farmers who are currently producing grains or oilseeds, and livestock. A lot can be done to encourage those farmers to adopt management practices and technologies that are more energy-efficient, more efficient in terms of nutrient use and other inputs, and as Professor Webb said, management practices such as more complicated crop rotation that would help the soil build up organic matter. There's a wide range of technological and management practices a farmer can use in order for a farm to become a sink for greenhouse gases rather than a source of emissions; however, at the moment farmers are not incentivized to do that.
In a study I led a couple of years ago, we showed farmers areas where they could manage their farms more sustainably. Their response to us was, “Yes, we know that, but we don't get paid for it.” The concept that, say, the Royal Bank is playing with is this: Can we establish what we might call carbon farms, where farmers are financially rewarded both for the food they produce as well as for the greenhouse gases they absorb? That would be one part of the vision.
The second part of the vision is with regard to greenhouses, vertical farms and alternative protein supplies. I'm aware of, and participating in, initiatives in Israel or Singapore where the truly most cutting-edge science is being applied to food systems, and I'm worried that Canada doesn't have a comparable or equivalent sort of zone or nucleus of technological innovation in agriculture. It's specifically things like vertical farming or cellular agriculture. I think we are producing—