I've been watching two competing farm narratives on my social media timeline.
The first is, "Farmers grow the food that feeds the world!". The second is, "Farms are businesses that grow commodity products, some of which are sometimes processed into food."

The regular use of these two narratives -- sometimes by the same social media accounts -- is entirely situational, targeted and strategic.

The first is often hurled as a rejoinder or interjected into a conversation that showcases rural/urban antagonism: You don't support farmers? I guess you don't like to eat! (It reminds me of Disney's Beast, where if Belle won't do as Beast says, he says she can STARVE!).

It's also the most common justification of farm policy support (from the farmgare to ag research and everything in between): Canadian farmers help feed the world. This narrative inserts moral authority, integrity and authenticity.

The second narrative, recasting farms not as food but as commodity production, is showing up a lot in conversations about the voluntary grain farmers code of practice under development and debate. "Responsible Grain – Standards for Canadian growers" https://responsiblegrain.ca 

This argument (commodity production) reminds everyone two things: farms are businesses that need to turn a profit; and, commodities need a lot of processing to become food -- it isn't 'food' that farms sell, it's unprocessed grains/oilseeds/pulses.

The commodity narrative deliberately recasts farms *out* of the food production chain, or at best, accepts only the early/raw/unprocessed part of the chain as farm responsibility.

Part of the drive is to resist any kind of intervention/regulation of farm practices beyond what exists now, especially if those carry costs. As business, farm bottom line matters.

The thing is, it's the first narrative (farms grow food to feed the world) -- and the way it's tossed around all the time -- that makes the @RespGrain code possibly necessary.

If farmers want the general public to vote for supportuve farm and agricultural business policy and use "we grow food to feed the world" as justification, then the public might want to know about farm food-growing practices -- via something like the code.

The second narrative of farms as commodity producers places more emphasis on the entire food chain: farms, but also trucking, elevators, grain companies, processors, suppliers and retail.
It's a fair point, and deserves solid consideration.

I'm not sure where I sit in this discussion. I'm just here, pointing out the irony of how farmers push both narratives, entirely depending on the situation.
Remember: my specialty is to think about stories, and to consider *why* we tell them the way we do.