Seed Sowing

Published as part of our Indigenous Perspectives series featuring Indigenous-led initiatives to address and respond to climate change.

Introduction

Across Canada, Indigenous leadership is being recognized as an essential component to addressing climate change (CAT, 2021). Much of this is because Indigenous Knowledge and Land¹ management practices encompass processes that are known to be effective and sustainable, with 80 per cent of the planet’s remaining biodiversity maintained on Indigenous-managed Lands (Ottenhoff, 2021; Sobrevila, 2008).

Indigenous worldviews offer a different perspective on social resilience to environmental change, one that is based on moral relationships of responsibility that connect humans to animals, plants, and habitats. These responsible practices not only ensure ecosystem goods and services are maintained for future generations, but, more importantly, they centre the moral qualities necessary to carry out these responsibilities: trust, consent, and reciprocity. Moral qualities of responsibility are the foundation that allows us to rely on each other when facing environmental change (Whyte, 2018).

At a time when governments are recognizing their failures in fulfilling obligations to Indigenous Peoples (UBCIC, n.d.), organizations and agencies across jurisdictions must be aware of how Indigenous leadership can be engaged to revive and protect shared environments within urban and peri-urban regions. Climate change threatens the urban natural infrastructure we depend on for a myriad of services, while urbanization encloses more of our natural spaces. Better protection and management of these natural spaces are instrumental to the well-being of humans and non-humans alike.

This case study explores the journey of an Indigenous-led grassroots initiative in the Grand River Territory within southern Ontario, which falls under what has been designated a “crisis ecoregion,” the Lake Erie Lowland (Kraus & Hebb, 2020). Through three stories that describe the fostering of distinct relationships within the Wisahkotewinowak collective (Wisahkotewinowak, 2021a), an urban Indigneous food sovereignty initiative, we illustrate how Indigenous leadership can enhance community efforts to transform our shared social spaces, built environments and ecological climates by:

finding Land use opportunities in natural urban places;
imagining and creating place for Land-based learning;
building and mobilizing community to enhance local biodiversity and social adaptations (Indigenous Climate Hub, 2020); and,
enhancing Indigenous food sovereignty practices towards community wellbeing.

We argue that these evolving relationships have integrated processes that are fundamental to robust and meaningful climate action, both in terms of centring Indigenous ways of caring for the Land as well as advancing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action through restoring Indigenous Peoples’ relationships to Land and pathways to wellness.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada explicitly calls for actions that close gaps in health equity, including food security (TRC, 2015). Climate change impacts such as heat waves and extreme rain will affect local food systems and security, an important determinant of health, through food accessibility, distribution and food safety (Zeuli et al, 2018; Schnitter & Berry, 2019). Food security within diverse Indigenous contexts, however, should not be narrowly defined as having enough to eat or sufficient household funds to purchase processed foods that may be more accessible. To restore sustainable relationships to the Land, culture, and communities, and advance reconciliation efforts alongside social and environmental justice, a resurgence of community roles and responsibilities is needed (Cidro et al., 2015). As Indigenous law scholar John Borrows (2018) contends, “reconciliation between Indigenous Peoples and the Crown requires our collective reconciliation with the earth” (p. 49). These considerations are particularly critical within urban and peri-urban places and spaces where natural environments are few and at greater risk from impacts of urbanization and climate change.

The stories presented here will illustrate these local initiatives and conclude with a series of best practices and recommendations to guide other groups, institutions, policy makers, and governments who wish to engage in similar work within diverse environments.

Laying the Groundwork

A clay pot was discovered during a construction dig several years ago in the Great Lakes region. Inside were tiny black tobacco seeds, perhaps once grown by the Tionontati who cultivated tobacco below the Niagara Escarpment (Ramsden, 2020). Gifted to local Indigenous Peoples living in present-day Kitchener, Ontario, these seeds eventually made their way into the hands of Dave Skene, an urban Métis who gardened as a way to connect to his Indigenous identity while living in the city. In 2014, Dave planted those tiny seeds in some soil, knowing that all they needed was some sun and water to grow.

A seed needs the right environment to grow. It needs nutrients from the Earth, moisture from Water and warmth from the Sun. All of these elements work together for germination to begin, the necessary conditions for new life to emerge.

Dave continued gardening and gathered other traditional seeds, including some white corn from nearby Haudenosaunee neighbours. Together with a group of local Indigenous students, he established, tended, cared for and harvested the gifts from his first community garden project. This new project needed a name, and Dave came across the word Wisahkotewinowak, which means “the growth of new green shoots that come up from Mother Earth after a fire has come through the Land.” As the purpose of the garden was to revitalize Indigenous Land-based practices, it was a fitting name. New life sprouted within this new place and among the people participating in it, revitalizing knowledge of and relationship with the Land.

From the nurtured seed comes the sprout, which cracks its way through the surface of the Earth. At this time, the sprout knows it will grow in that place, putting roots down into the soil as it reaches upwards to the Sun. In this phase of growth, the right environment is essential, including the right conditions and the right helpers, including other plants to help share resources, and sometimes human hands to help mediate elements lacking in the ecosystem.

Soon after its establishment, Wisahkotewinowak outgrew its initial garden location. So, in 2017, Dave began dreaming with university professors Hannah Tait Neufeld and Kim Anderson about how they could support the health of urban Indigenous communities through Indigenous food sovereignty and access to Land. Through their relationship and individual connections, new gardens were established across the region at Steckle Heritage Farm, the Guelph Organic Centre at the University of Guelph, and the University of Waterloo. And last spring, White Owl Native Ancestry Association staff (Garrison, Sarina and Dave) developed the Indigenous teaching garden at the Blair Outdoor Education Centre.

With this holistic environmental support, the sprout can mature into a plant. And at this time, the plant is able to participate in sharing profoundly with its community. First, it flowers, inviting pollinators to feed from its nectar and carry its pollen widely to other plant-kin. Then, it offers fruit as nourishment to its animal-kin. Finally, with the unconsumed fruit, the plant creates seeds that contain the next generation of life, ready for gathering, sharing, and future planting.

The Wisahkotewinowak Collective grew with each new garden and nurtured relationships in community. Meaningful places were created at these garden sites, and we have welcomed more students, academics, activists and Elders to become involved. The authors of this case study are the Collective’s core group, Indigenous (First Nation and Métis) and settler-allies who also wear many hats as gardeners, researchers/academics, teachers/educators, students and lifelong learners. As a Collective, our relationships extend to many youth, students, families, Elders and non-human kin in the places that sustain us. We are grateful to cultivate and care for the Land at the different garden sites, which grow within the Territories of the Attawandaron (Neutral), Anishinaabe, and Haudenosaunee Peoples, and the Treaty Lands of the Mississaugas of the Credit and the Haldimand Tract of the Six Nations of the Grand River. Our connection with the gardens is also in relation to the Dish with One Spoon Territory, which we strive to uphold by taking only what we need, leaving some for the next person, and keeping the dish clean.

We are beginning to see the fruits of our work as we develop processes of relationship building, sharing food in community and continuing to grow and harvest food in self-determined ways across the Waterloo-Wellington municipalities we call home.

1. Creating Grounded Opportunities: The White Owl Sugar Bush

In 2016, White Owl Native Ancestry Association staff were invited to give a talk at Emmanuel United Church in Waterloo, Ontario. The congregation had donated to White Owl’s summer camps for Indigenous children and youth in the region, and program staff came to speak about some of the camp activities. Afterwards, a member of the church’s council asked if there was anything else the congregation could do to support White Owl’s work. Michelle Sutherland, co-Executive Director of White Owl and one of the presenters, replied “you could give us some Land.”

Coincidentally, the church owned a parcel of Land, and offered it to White Owl (McFarlane Miller, 2020). The United Church had purchased 10.5 acres of Land in the 1960s, with the intention of building a new church there. These development plans were hindered by the presence of the endangered Jefferson Salamander. The Land was given designation as a protected site by the City of Kitchener. It is estimated that only 3000 genetically pure Jefferson Salamanders exist in Canada within mature woodlands of the Niagara escarpment and Carolinian forest regions that contain suitable temporary or vernal pools ideal for breeding (COSEWIC, 2010). The former church Land contained the perfect environment for the salamanders. As a site of mixed forest including maple, oak, beech and some pine trees, White Owl leaders recognized the potential for holding community gatherings and ceremonies, and knew that the Wisahkotewinowak Collective would be interested in harvesting maple sap. It took a year for the legal process to transpire. A ceremony was held between leaders of White Owl and the United Church of Canada to mark the official transfer of Land ownership in 2017. The site is now known as the White Owl Sugar Bush.

In 2020, one hundred maple trees were tapped on the White Owl Land, providing the sweet water to community Elders for ceremonial purposes and boiling the rest of the sap into 110 litres of maple syrup, which was shared in the White Owl food distribution program, that supports access to Indigenous and other local foods for Indigenous community members locally (Wisahkotewinowak, 2021b). The mating season of the Jefferson Salamander coincides with the warming days of early spring, when the sweet water begins to flow into the maple trees. When Wisahkotewinowak gathers in the Sugar Bush to honour this annual awakening, we come into relationship with both the Maple and the Jefferson. That is, we engage in relating to these non-human beings from a place of respect, reciprocity and kindness, which are maintained through continued communication, consent, and advocacy. By producing maple syrup, we are establishing a sense of place and Land sovereignty– strengthened by concurrently nurturing and protecting the diversity of life that resides in the bush, which preserves this piece of forest from nearby development. Furthermore, we are working to protect maple trees as they are threatened by climate change (GreenUP, 2021). As Indigenous understandings and lived realities of relationship with the environment are inherently nature-based, they provide a number of solutions that mitigate climate change and work to support and advance reconciliation that will benefit the wellness of the larger community.

Video credit: Christina De Melo.

The development of surrounding farmlands into suburbs is a constant reminder of the importance of cultural and natural preservation that moves towards ecosystem restoration. By finding and seizing opportunities in natural urban spaces (i.e. what some may call underutilized spaces) to restore relationships to Land, we move beyond conservation by helping to safeguard our remaining biodiversity and support the revitalization of Indigenous Knowledge, which teaches us regenerative, relational ways of being and doing towards climate action.

2. Learning on the Land: Partnering with Educational Institutions

The increasing recognition of climate change can be paralysing, especially for Indigenous youth and other young adults (Majeed & Lee, 2017; Mackay et al., 2020). We can ease this distress for young people in our communities by engaging them in projects that promote connectedness to place, culture, and community (Clayton et al., 2017). Indigenous Land-based learning has been taken up in recent years by a number of post-secondary institutions within Canada (Peach et al., 2020; Brandon, 2012). According to Indigenous ways of knowing, we are only as healthy as our environments. As such, our Collective addresses sustainable Land-based practices in a diversity of settings, including working with academic institutions such as the University of Guelph, the University of Waterloo and Conestoga College. Beginning in spring of 2018, we have established garden sites, with the assistance of the local Indigenous community, at the University of Guelph Organic Farm, University of Waterloo campus, and are in the planning stages at Conestoga College. The aim is to address food access and knowledge barriers and explore innovative Land-based education and sustainable practices that reinforce the wellbeing and decolonization of our built and social environments.

With the support of Indigenous community partners, students engage in hands-on work tending Indigenous food and medicine gardens within these postsecondary institutional spaces. This work allows us to focus on reconnecting with the Land within diverse urban spaces and embark on reciprocal relationships in developing partnerships with the local Indigenous community in the region, as well as working with Elders from Six Nations of the Grand River as part of a larger research project (Roberts, 2018). The collaborative knowledge produced throughout this ongoing research will contribute to reducing knowledge barriers by way of advocacy, extending reach and changing perceptions of physical or built environments beyond clinical and institutional spaces.

We have also begun working with the Waterloo Region District School Board and are establishing a garden at the Blair Outdoor Education Centre. This garden expanded threefold from 2019 to 2020, from 11 square metres to 270 square metres in size, increasing both its food growing capacity and teaching opportunity for the students that spend time in this space. As an outcome, 475 students were able to learn at the centre between September and December 2019. Although program attendance numbers were reduced due to strike action in the region and COVID-19, a total estimated 1,625 students would have attended from September 2019 to June 2020. Additionally, this garden space has provided a bounty of foods included in the weekly White Owl distribution program. We estimate that about 730 lbs of food was harvested from this space from August to November 2020 to be shared with 31 households and approximately 250 people.

Gardens and Land-based camps have also been operating in south Kitchener at the Steckle Heritage Farm since the spring of 2017. The now-urban farm is an educational site operated by a non-profit, community-based organization dedicated to providing agricultural, environmental and cultural programs to children and families in the Region of Waterloo. Along with school tours and day camps, camps for Indigenous youth organized by White Owl Native Ancestry Association have taken place on site, with a focus on Indigenous gardening and food preparation practices. These practices include diverse processes such as nixtamalizing Haudenosaunee white corn, tanning deer hides, and preserving Cherokee tomatoes. On a deeper level, these Land-based practices mitigate and strengthen local environments, and provide a means for urban Indigenous youth (and others) to reinforce their innate connection to the Earth that sustains us, by caring for the Land, learning with the ancestral seeds that they plant, and meaningfully interacting with the foods they consume and share with others.

3. Building Community within Urban Spaces: The Uniroyal Goodrich Park

Uniroyal Goodrich Park in Kitchener, Ontario, lies nestled in a community-oriented neighbourhood not far from where a central highway runs alongside the Grand River. It boasts a thriving community garden with a variety of trees surrounding the perimeter. In 2018, the park was slotted for reconstruction to enhance the retaining wall, assess a still-water pond and add new plantings with a new trail being established there by the city. As conversations around these plans developed, the neighbourhood group wished to establish relationships with the local Indigenous community and engage their perspectives as the park underwent this reconstruction phase. One of the neighbourhood group leaders and city liaison, Sarah Anderson, connected with Dave at this time, who embraced this relationship, seeing the possibility for an orchard to support local Indigenous food sovereignty efforts.

In 2019, these relationships continued to build, with the park leadership offering to create a ceremonial fire space. White Owl held summer day camps for Indigenous children and youth in the space. A maple syrup event was planned for the spring of 2020, which was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the lack of an in-person gathering, community and municipal representatives have remained committed to the park’s transformation. They reimagined the park as a more naturalized area, and set out to incorporate more native species, add new infrastructure and community art; and ultimately create a space for Indigenous plants and community to grow. In the fall of 2020, maple, paw paws and serviceberry trees were planted, with plans to increase local biodiversity underway.

This story demonstrates how the Land can bring together different groups and relationships to act and make decisions in the best interest of the local environment or community habitat. The Land provides the literal common ground to come together. As this process unfolds, relationships continue growing between the City of Kitchener, the local neighbourhood group, and our Indigenous Collective. Because of this, Wisahkotewinowak is currently engaging in conversations about other municipal sites that can be collectively transformed for community benefit (both human and non-human). These connections seed other relationships, and further pollinate ideas for reconciliation—with each other and with the Land. We continue developing these relationships (human and non-human) and envision future additions of pollinator plants and fruit trees to the space (Anderson, 2020). Through these processes of adaptation and restoration, we aim to account for All Our Relations, who deserve a place to belong and thrive, thereby slowing biodiversity losses associated with the impacts of climate change. We look forward to a time soon when we can gather in community, celebrate these relationships together and continue to establish these moral qualities of responsibility to the Land and each other.

Continuing to Grow and Learn from the Land and Community

As illustrated across the stories presented, the Wisahkotewinowak Collective is engaged in innovative projects that show how Indigenous-led efforts can encompass sustainable environmental action and activities supporting local movements, such as O:se Kenhionhata:tie. Throughout its evolution, the Collective has seized opportunities by creating places and spaces for Land-based community learning, and safeguarded and enhanced local biodiversity. These actions were achieved by processes of environmental action such as establishing relationships that support collective ecological wellness with All Our Relations: people, plants, animals, and the Land. Our three stories exemplify how relationships establish processes that form the basis of transformative actions to benefit our shared social, built and ecological environments.

As a Collective, we continue to reflect on our responsibilities and our position in relation to the local Territories. We will carry on caring for the Land and encourage others to add to this evolving story of relationship-building and decolonization. Relationships require time, energy and accountability, and when successfully engaged they can seed other relationships and ideas for reconciliation with each other and the Land. We see this work as transferable to urban Indigenous communities, with the potential to inform all levels of policy making and other systems of governance beyond colonial structures. Our recommendations are framed by the seed story model below that encompass four essential stages: receiving the gift of the seed, planting the seed, nurturing the seed, and harvesting, saving and sharing the seed.

1. Receiving the gift of the seed establishes a relationship rooted in understanding responsibilities, recognizing opportunities, and envisioning possibilities. Before the seed is planted, we must assess the local environment to ensure the seed has a good chance of thriving, while acknowledging our responsibility to help carry out the seed’s purpose or intention. At the community level, we can initiate relationship-building processes by engaging with local Indigenous organizations and local leaders to support the generation of ideas and networks supporting environmental action. Initial steps can include:

At the local level: identifying resources, such as funds or natural areas perceived as underutilized spaces, and offer their use and related decision-making authority to Indigenous groups.
At a policy level: creating opportunities for building networks and partnerships across jurisdictional spheres, and building new frameworks supporting Indigenous governance.

2. Planting the seed takes place when we are ready to act on the emerging vision. The necessary resources are secured, relationships are established, and the responsibility to support the seed’s journey is accepted. The time of planting requires that conditions of these elements come together and progress through the following steps:

At the local level: establishing a community that can commit to project goals and see them to fruition, including ensuring that all project partners understand and agree to project conditions such as duration, decision-making power and securing adequate resources.
At a policy level: eliminating barriers to Land access and creating space for Indigenous governance by simplifying legal processes and documentation to support the transfer of Land agreements and trusts.

3. Nurturing the seed is an ongoing process through the growing season as the seed’s needs and components of its surrounding environment are established through a cycle of planning, monitoring, assessing, responding, and upholding the emerging network’s responsibility towards the seed. At this stage of the cycle, mutual trust is fostered within the web of relations residing in this cultivated space and place, where the seed relies on these reciprocal relationships to emerge and support its ongoing maturity. We can practice this process by:

At the local level: establishing and upholding commitments to Indigenous groups through continued relationship-building, and navigating challenges with the intention of preserving shared goals.
At a policy level: supporting the expansion of the work through Land-based learning, with Indigenous organizations through institutional and other advisory groups with diverse representation (i.e., organizational, cultural, gender).

4. Harvesting, saving and sharing the seed can occur when the mature plant brings new opportunities. When these gifts are offered seasonally, seeds can be harvested for saving and sharing. In this way, we must recognize opportunities to expand the life of the original seed, and continue the cycles of growth and connection in our communities by:

At the community level: identifying ways that elements of the project can be replicated or expanded by renewing and investing in existing—as well as developing new—relationships to preserve these opportunities until there is local capacity.
At the policy level: centring Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous Knowledges in these emerging opportunities that cut across all forms of governance.

The seed cycle continues, as do these relational processes towards sustainable Land practices. These stages continue to expand across all forms of knowledge towards the improved health and wellbeing of Indigenous Peoples within diverse urban environments. Just as the seed metaphor frames our shared experience, the seed is a gift that must be consistently cared for, as are the relationships shared in these stories. Both are tangible entities we intentionally compare in this way, as seed and relationship require continual energy and intention, and both have the potential to bear fruitful opportunities for the future. Most importantly, the seed and its evolving story need to be treated as the gift that it is, inspiring us to pursue meaningful pathways towards reconciliation and ecological action.

About the authors

Written by members of the Wisahkotewinowak Collective²

Elisabeth Miltenburg, MSc
Applied Human Nutrition, University of Guelph

Hannah Tait Neufeld, PhD
Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Health, Wellness and Food Environments, Assistant Professor, School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo

Laura Peach, MA
Research Project Manager, School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo

Sarina Perchak, BA
Land-based Education Coordinator, White Owl Native Ancestry Association

Dave Skene, MA
Executive Director, White Owl Native Ancestry Association

References

Anderson, S. 2020. “A visit with the Wisahkotewinowak Indigenous gardening collective.” LoveMyHood (October 15). Retrieved from: https://www.lovemyhood.ca/Modules/News/blogcomments.aspx?BlogId=85cd27ac-087f-4f97-ad1b-3926195965d7#

Clayton, S., C. Manning, K. Krygsman, and M. Speiser. 2017. Mental health and our changing climate: Impacts, implications, and guidance. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, and ecoAmerica. Retrieved from: https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2017/03/mental-health-climate.pdf

Brandon, D. C. 2012. “Indigenous teaching gardens open.” Illuminate: Faculty Education Magazine. Retrieved from: https://illuminate.ualberta.ca/content/indigenous-teaching-gardens-open.

Borrows, J. 2018. “Earth-Bound: Indigenous Resurgence and Environmental Reconciliation.” In Resurgence and Reconciliation: Indigenous-Settler Relations and Earth Teachings, edited by Michael Asch, John Borrows, and James Tully, p. 49-82. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Cidro, J., B. Adekunle, E. Peters, and T. Martens. 2015. “Beyond food security: Understanding access to cultural food for urban Indigenous people in Winnipeg as Indigenous food sovereignty.” Canadian Journal of Urban Research, 24(1), 24-43.

Climate Action Team. 2021. Manitoba’s road to resilience: A community climate action pathway to a fossil fuel free future. Retrieved from: https://www.climateactionmb.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Manitobas-Road-to-Resilience_2021.pdf

COSEWIC. 2010. “COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Jefferson Salamander Ambystoma jeffersonianum in Canada.” Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. Retrieved from: https://sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/cosewic/sr_jefferson_salamander_0911_eng.pdf

GreenUP. 2021. “Climate change threatens southern Ontario’s maple forests and our beloved maple syrup: The ‘sweet water’ of the sugar maple connects us to Indigenous heritage and settler traditions.” KawarthaNOW.com. February 25. https://kawarthanow.com/2021/02/25/climate-change-threatens-southern-ontarios-maple-forests-and-our-beloved-maple-syrup/

Indigenous Climate Hub. 2020. “Community social networks and Indigenous resilience to climate change.” Indigenous Climate Hub. November 16. https://indigenousclimatehub.ca/2020/11/community-social-networks-and-indigenous-resilience-to-climate-change/

Kraus, D. and A. Hebb. 2020. “Southern Canada’s crisis ecoregions: Identifying the most significant and threatened places for biodiversity conservation.” Biodiversity and Conservation, 29:3573-3590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-020-02038-x

Majeed, H. and J. Lee. 2017. “The impact of climate change on youth depression and mental health.” The Lancet Planetary Health, 1(3), e94-e95.

MacKay, M., B. Parlee, and C. Karsgaard. 2020. “Youth engagement in climate change action: Case study on indigenous youth at COP24.” Sustainability, 12(16), 6299.

McFarlan Miller, E. 2020. “Churches return land to Indigenous groups as part of #LandBack movement.” Religion News Service. November 26. https://religionnews.com/2020/11/26/churches-return-land-to-indigenous-groups-amid-repentance-for-role-in-taking-it-landback-movement/

Ottenhoff, L. 2021. “Indigenous conservation can get Canada to climate goals: former MP Ethel Blondin-Andrew to Trudeau.” Canada’s National Observer. January 25. https://www.nationalobserver.com/2021/01/25/news/climate-change-indigenous-knowledge-ethel-blondin-andrew

Peach, L., Richmond, C. A., & Brunette-Debassige, C. 2020. “‘You can’t just take a piece of land from the university and build a garden on it’: Exploring Indigenizing space and place in a settler Canadian university context.” Geoforum, 114, 117-127.

Ramsden, P. 2020. “Tionontati (Petun).” The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved from: https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/petun

Roberts, O. 2018. “Traditional food gets a boost in southwestern Ontario.” GuelphToday. March 18. https://www.guelphtoday.com/columns/urban-cowboy-with-owen-roberts/traditional-food-gets-a-boost-in-southwestern-ontario-862287

Schnitter, R., Berry, P. 2019. “The climate change, food security and human health nexus in Canada: A framework to protect population health.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(14): 2531. Doi: 10.3390/ijerph16142531

Sobrevilla, C. 2008. “The role of Indigenous Peoples in biodiversity conversation: The natural but often forgotten partners.” The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank: Washington, D.C., USA.

TRC. 2015. “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action.” Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Winnipeg, MB. Retrieved from: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/british-columbians-our-governments/indigenous-people/aboriginal-peoples-documents/calls_to_action_english2.pdf

UBCIC. n.d. “UN human rights report shows that Canada is failing Indigenous peoples joint statement.” Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs. https://www.ubcic.bc.ca/canadafailingindigenouspeoples

Wisahkotewinowak. 2021a. “Wisahkotewinowak: An urban Indigenous garden collective in the Waterloo-Wellington region.” Retrieved from: https://www.wisahk.ca/

Wisahkotewinowak. 2021b. Outreach. Retrieved from: https://www.wisahk.ca/outreach-events

Whyte, Kyle. 2018. “Critical Investigations of Resilience: A Brief Introduction to Indigenous Environmental Studies & Sciences”. The American Academy of Arts & Sciences, 147(2): 136-147. doi:10.1162/DAED_a_00497

Zeuli, K., Nijhuis, A., Macfarlane, R., Ridsdale, T. 2018. “The impact of climate change on the food system in Toronto.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(11), 2344. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112344

Ayookxw Responding to Climate Change

Published as part of our Indigenous Perspectives series featuring Indigenous-led initiatives to address and respond to climate change.

Introduction

The Gitanyow people of the Middle Nass and Upper Skeena watersheds, located on unceded territory in northwestern British Columbia, are governing ourselves and exercising jurisdiction over the Lax’yip (territory) through the Ayookxw (Gitanyow laws). The ability of the Gitanyow to carry out these responsibilities is impeded by ongoing colonialism and the decisions of the settler state, primarily the Province of British Columbia, to permit activities in Gitanyow Lax’yip without the consent of the Gitanyow. The cumulative impacts of forestry, highways, mining, proposed pipelines and the Northwest transmission line have spurred Gitanyow to develop contemporary expressions of our Ayookxw to counter the colonial administrative apparatus. A comprehensive land use plan and other legal and policy instruments have been developed to establish Gitanyow standards for the behaviour of industrial proponents in the Lax’yip.

A key part of this sustainability approach is acknowledging the broader impacts of climate change on Gitanyow territory. Gitanyow understand that water flow from glaciers is an important part of the ecology of some watersheds, which will change over time as glaciers recede. What has historically been good fish habitat may no longer serve the same fish populations, and other streams may become more suitable fish habitat. While the land use plan has been a foundational policy instrument in addressing cumulative effects, its signing in 2012 predates the more significant impacts of climate change in the Lax’yip that are now more common.

To address these changing conditions, Gitanyow established a Sustainability Director position and have embedded climate change assessment criteria and adaptability into policies and practices. Examples of this attention to climate change include evaluating environmental flows and water quality throughout the Lax’yip, glacier surveys, and developing a water quality and quantity policy. The overall objective of this work is to set standards for activities and cumulative impacts in the Lax’yip and require proponents to demonstrate that their proposed project or activity will not exceed those standards.

Glossary of Gitanyow terms

Lax’yip: The ancestral territories of the Gitanyow.

Wilp: House group—the primary political, social, and decision-making unit of the Gitanyow, each with its own well-defined territories managed according to a strong and enduring system of land management.

Huwilp: The collective of eight Wilp that collectively constitute the Gitanyow People.

Ayookxw: Gitanyow laws that ensure peace and order for the Huwilp.

Adawaak: The oral history of each Wilp.

Ayuuks: Crests that codify the oral history of each Wilp.

Li’ligit: A formal public gathering and feast initiated by a Wilp to conduct its business.

For more information, see “Legal Principles Underlying the Gitanyow Lax’yip Land Use Plan.”

Gitanyow Nation: Governance and Territory

The Gitanyow people are collectively known as the Gitanyow Huwilp. The Lax’yip (territory) is located primarily in the Middle Nass and Upper Skeena watersheds and covers a total area of 6296 square kilometres. The Gitanyow Huwilp refers to the collective of eight Wilp (house groups), organized into two Pdeek (clans), the Lax Gibuu (Wolf) and the Lax Ganeda (Frog/Raven). The Lax’yip of each Wilp is embedded in the Git’mgan (totem pole) and is rooted in Adawaak (oral history of each Wilp), Ayuuks (crests), and Ayookxw (Gitanyow law). Each Wilp has jurisdiction and exclusive rights to Wilp names, Adawaak, Ayuuks, Git’mgan and Lax’yip.

The Gitanyow Huwilp are an autonomous, social, economic and political unit of the larger cultural group the Gitksan peoples. Each Wilp has well defined territories managed according to a strong and enduring system of land ownership and management. Individual Wilp exercise jurisdiction over their territory and Wilp members on issues such as access to land and water, succession in the use of land and water, protection of land and the environment for future generations, and reaffirmation of authority and responsibility over the territory. The Gitanyow histories, laws, territories and institutions have always existed and will continue to exist forever, and are recognized by the Province of British Columbia and Government of Canada pursuant to section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. In addition, the Gitanyow people have entered into a number of government-to-government agreements with British Columbia where the Province has recognized the Gitanyow people’s authority and jurisdiction to make decisions based on our own laws, policies, responsibilities and protocols.

"Ayookxw Responding to Climate Change" showcases efforts to build a comprehensive understanding of the ecological health of Gitanyow territory and translating that knowledge into climate policy. https://t.co/o96QASlc4n
— Canadian Climate Institute (@ClimateInstit) June 21, 2021

The Ayookxw are Gitanyow laws that ensure peace and order for the Huwilp. Ayookxw set out ownership of the land, use of and care for the environment, conduct of a Li’ligit (feast), relationship with one another, and inheritance. Ayookxw are founded on knowledge, experiences and practices that are thousands of years old and are recounted in the Adawaak and Ayuuks. Ayookxw is reaffirmed and confirmed through testimony on the Adawaak and the Li’ligit. A Wilp and the Huwilp may adopt new Ayookxw in order to meet new and evolving challenges of the contemporary world. Recognition for Ayookxw is part of the framework of section 35, Constitution Act, 1982, put forward by the people and governments of Canada. The Gitanyow have documented our oral Ayookxw into The Gitanyow Constitution, 2009, to help the provincial and federal governments better understand the Indigenous laws of the Gitanyow.

A key feature of the Gitanyow Lax’yip and culture is the annual return of several species of salmon throughout the watersheds. The many small catchments that contribute to the ecology and flow of eight major watersheds—the Bell-Irving, Cranberry, Kinskuch, Kispiox, Meziadin, Nass, Skeena and White Rivers watersheds—ultimately connect to either the Skeena River or the Nass River. Watersheds in the Gitanyow Lax’yip typically follow a seasonal pattern where snow and ice mean low flows in the winter, the spring freshet results in maximum annual flows, summer flows are variable but warm in July and August depending on the amount of rain, and autumn flows uneven. Groundwater is a variable and largely unknown factor as it interacts with surface water bodies, but it can provide cooling in summer months.

In addition to salmon, other important species to the Gitanyow include trout, moose, cedar, grizzly bear, mountain goat, furbearers such as marten and beaver, pine mushrooms, and berries and medicinal plants such as devil’s club, hellebore and Labrador tea, among others. Gitanyow also trade extensively with coastal First Nations for seafood, seaweed, oolichans, and sea lion.

Contemporary expressions of Gitanyow authority are carried out through the Gitanyow Fisheries Authority and the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs’ Office. In addition to managing the salmon fishery through the Gitanyow Fisheries Authority, Gitanyow’s Lax’yip Guardians provide environmental monitoring services for forestry, major projects development, water quality and quantity, hunting permitting, and other wildlife related monitoring throughout the Lax’yip. A combination of fish and wildlife biologists and trained Gitanyow field technicians provide territory-based services for the good of the Gitanyow Huwilp under the direction of the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs.

**Figure 1**: Map of Gitanyow Lax’yip and Simgigyet (used with permission of the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs’ Office)

Wilp Sustainability Approach

The Gitanyow have a direct and longstanding relationship with the land, water and all of the watersheds within the environment that sustains us. We depend on healthy watersheds to exercise our aboriginal rights to activities such as fishing, hunting, trapping, food and medicinal plant gathering, and spiritual practices. This strong relationship to the land and waters makes protecting and managing land and water critical to Gitanyow culture.

In response to the cumulative impacts on the Lax’yip from non-Gitanyow forestry activities, in 2012 the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs enacted the Gitanyow Lax’yip Land Use Plan as a physical expression of Ayookxw that translated legal responsibilities into site-specific directives for anyone – including colonial governments and non-Indigenous natural resource users – permitting or undertaking activities within Gitanyow territory. The Gitanyow Lax’yip Land Use Plan provides management direction for a variety of land use objectives largely oriented to habitat, zones of special designation and protection given threats from forestry activities. Examples of these designations and objectives include Water Management Units, Ecosystem Networks, and the Hanna Tintina Conservancy (a protected area designation in Gitanyow and colonial law that provides for collaborative management and the exercise of aboriginal rights). Objectives and designations also mention monitoring, identifying, and maintaining target or baseline values of water quantity and quality.

The Plan is a fusing of western science and Indigenous Gitanyow knowledge, and was negotiated with the Provincial Government over a ten-year period. Previous to the Plan, forestry consultation was an ad-hoc process and was done primarily at the site-specific level, cut-block by cut-block. There was no overarching landscape level plan to address cumulative effects or to provide greater certainty to both industry and the Gitanyow that consensus was being achieved on development plans. This uncertainty led to multiple court cases brought by Gitanyow in the late 1990s and early 2000s to address these issues. The BC Supreme Court provided critical recognition of Gitanyow culture and rights and gave government instructions that would help inform the mandate for the negotiation of the Plan.

While the Plan contains key water protection spatial zones including Water Management Units and Ecosystem Networks, which are now protected from logging and industrial activity, it does not deal directly with water flows needed for salmon habitat and ecosystem function in the face of climate change, or water quality standards in the face of impacts from upstream mining activity in Tahltan Nation territory. In 2017 the Gitanyow Chiefs made the decision to commence drafting a Gitanyow Water Policy Law to address these impacts.

For the past nine years we have been building from our Gitanyow Lax’yip Land Use Plan to develop legal and policy instruments that express our Indigenous rights, direct how activities in our territory will occur, and establish baselines for ecological function in light of climate changes impacts, particularly with regard to flows in our creeks and streams. Bringing together Indigenous knowledge and western science, this work includes establishing ecological baselines, setting standards and developing processes. Ecological baselines include evaluating environmental-flow-needs thresholds for several creeks affected by climate change while setting standards and processes include creating a water quality and quantity policy and assessment process.

Responding to the Complexity of Climate Change

The development of additional outward-facing legal and policy tools and ecological baselines involve water because the cumulative effects of climate change in the territory, including an increase in temperature and decrease in water flows in salmon-spawning rivers, makes proactive water management a necessity. Three projects, in particular, draw Gitanyow knowledge and western science together into policy frameworks for adaptation and mitigation of climate change risks. First, the Gitanyow Sustainability Director has worked with a number of staff and consultants for three years to define environmental flows in some creeks, both in ones that already have reduced flows due to climate change and in others where flows are still healthy for fish. The second project involves glacier surveys and mapping to better understand the extent of water potential held in glaciers and evaluate the rate of climate change based on changing water flows into the territory from glaciers. Third, the Gitanyow Sustainability Director is working with the Environmental Law Centre at the University of Victoria and consultants to draft a Gitanyow Lax’yip water policy/law to state Gitanyow’s objectives for water management, and identify water quality standards and environmental flows that maintain and enhance ecological health. Similar to the Gitanyow Lax’yip Land Use Plan, the water policy will outline responsibilities for colonial governments and proponents when operating in Gitanyow territory, including protection and restoration of watershed function.

Environmental Flows and Water Quality

Fish are a central part of Gitanyow culture, and the cumulative impacts of forestry, climate change and mining, in particular, have resulted in changes to water flows and quality that have struck at the heart of that culture. Sockeye stocks have decreased consistently over the past decade, and Gitanyow were concerned that declining water quality and quantity were damaging salmon health and reproduction. Moreover, scientific studies commissioned by the Gitanyow indicated the importance of healthy freshwater for overall ecosystem function in sensitive areas such as old growth forests. Over the past five years, Gitanyow has witnessed largely unprecedented droughts and forest fires in the majority of summer seasons.

While forest fires can play an important role in the health of ecosystems, droughts in northwest B.C., especially during July and August when salmon are migrating to their upriver spawning grounds, can have devastating and long-lasting impacts on populations. The recent Preliminary Strategic Climate Risk Assessment for British Columbia predicts that going forward to 2050, the risk of seasonal water shortage, glacier mass loss, and long-term water shortage is high throughout the province.

With very limited western science data available for water quality or quantity in the Gitanyow Lax’yip, the Gitanyow Fisheries Authority and the Gitanyow Lax’yip Guardians initiated a baseline water monitoring program. Building on the three hydrometric stations operated by the Water Survey of Canada, the Gitanyow added and operate seven stations, and have used the resulting data to develop preliminary environmental flow needs for three important watercourses in the Lax’yip – Hanna Creek, Tintina Creek and Cranberry River. Future plans include developing environmental flow needs for other high-priority systems, where there is significant risk to the water, or where proposed projects may have an impact on the watercourse.

For the three years of 2018-2020 staff collected year-round water quality data at sites representing five watersheds, contributing to the development of specific water quality parameters at these locations. The Gitanyow Fisheries Authority has also conducted limnology surveys for multiple years from May to October on several lakes, sampling nutrients and establishing physicochemical parameters with a view to developing water quality standards for these lakes.

Both Hanna and Tintina Creeks are important spawning creeks, but they have both been significantly degraded by logging. The dual impacts of historic logging impacts and climate change have meant that some years there is virtually no flow in some parts of the creeks. Now designated within a protected area called the Hanna-Tintina Conservancy that encompasses nearly the entirety of both watersheds, the purpose of the conservancy is to protect the high-value salmon spawning habitat that historically supported 80 per cent of Nass River sockeye.

Gitanyow staff are evaluating the value of recognizing other waterbodies, such as Strohn Creek, as important current and future spawning areas, given the impacts of climate change and relatively consistent flows in some of these waterbodies.

In 2016, Gitanyow began efforts to expand the Hanna Tintina Conservancy to include Strohn and Surprise Creeks, as well as the smaller streams that feed into Meziadin Lake. Despite five years of ongoing efforts from Gitanyow through the reconciliation table of the Joint Resources Governance Forum, however, the province has not taken any concrete action to protect the areas around Strohn and Surprise Creeks. A joint process to explore various provincial legal designations began in 2017, but to date no option has been selected by the province. Gitanyow is now seeking to establish the entire Meziadin area as an Indigenous Protected Area and communicate management direction to industrial proponents, specifically mineral exploration companies.

Glacier Surveys and Mapping

In support of developing the Gitanyow Water Policy, an inventory of glaciers in the Gitanyow Lax’yip was commissioned in 2019. Understanding the extent, size and rate of recession of glaciers in the Gitanyow Lax’yip is critical information to plan for and mitigate against climate change. As annual snowpack declines due to climate change, glaciers become even more critical in providing flows and cooling in summer months. Partnering with the Coast Mountain College in Terrace, the Gitanyow Lax’yip Glacier Inventory, 2020 provides the current state of glaciers in the Lax’yip, their rate of recession, and their meltwater contribution to various watersheds. Future work will include modelling for future further recession and potential implications for salmon ecosystems.

Water Policy

Most recently, Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs staff have merged Gitanyow Ayookxw with the water quality and quantity data to create a draft Gitanyow Lax’yip Water Policy. The intent is to establish watershed-specific standards that anyone undertaking activities within the Lax’yip must adhere to. The policy establishes a classification of surface waters, procedures for evaluating water quality using water quality standards and assessment of biological communities, procedures for evaluating environmental flow needs, and a water management technical process. The policy was motivated by growing awareness among the Gitanyow around 2017 that water was becoming a scarce resource in many parts of B.C. and globally, and that future declines in water availability caused by climate change, compounded with the potential impact of upstream mining contaminants, could have significant impacts on salmon and salmon ecosystems.

Waterbody classification involves assigning Type I, Type II or Type III status to all waterbodies of the Lax’yip (see Figure 2). Type I waterbodies are the most sensitive or at highest risk due to ecological, hydrological and/or cultural significance or specific use. Type 1 waterbody characteristics include human consumption, high fishery or cultural value, are in protected areas and/or are highly vulnerable to climate change and its cumulative effects. In Type I waters, the natural flow regime must remain unaltered and water quality must meet or exceed current conditions. Type II waterbodies are at high risk or sensitivity and “provide critical upstream or downstream connectivity and processes that support human health, aquatic and terrestrial communities, and ecosystem function but may not currently directly support criteria/characteristics of Type I waterbodies”. Type II waterbodies provide important connectivity with Type I waterbodies, support other waterbodies or areas of ecological or cultural importance, and are vulnerable to climate change and cumulative effects. Flows in Type II waterbodies cannot be altered more than 10 percent and never below environmental flow needs. While additional human activities are permitted in Type II waterbodies, no alteration or degradation of instream conditions is allowed, and natural flow regimes must be maintained. Type III waterbodies are at lower risk or sensitivity. Water flows in Type III waterbodies may be altered up to 10 percent but never below environmental flow needs without “extensive additional field-based assessment to develop robust environmental flow needs and flow management planning”. Water quality in Type III waterbodies must meet or exceed water quality standards for the protection of aquatic, terrestrial and human health.

**Figure 2**: Map of preliminary designated waterbody classifications within the Gitanyow Lax’yip. This map is subject to change. (used with permission of the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs’ Office)

In addition to cultural, fishery and water supply values, there are also a number of climate-related criteria: thermal refugia, climate change risk and glacier conservation. Climate-related criteria emphasize the connection between decreasing snowpack, glacier mass, and summer-time droughts and the compounding risk this entails for already sensitive waterbodies. In many cases, climate change alone is all the impact that a sensitive waterbody may be able to tolerate, meaning that any water extraction or industrial use may be prohibited.

The policy also acknowledges the importance of restoration efforts, with one of the waterbody classification criteria being the need to develop and implement a recovery plan, and defines Gitanyow environmental flow needs:

Gitanyow “environmental flow needs” (EFN) are defined as the desirable conditions of streams on the Lax’yip that maintain natural in-stream flow regimes and sustain healthy ecosystems. This includes flows that allow for maintenance of flow-related watershed processes (e.g., flood plain maintenance).

The policy establishes water quality standards for specific sites based on the water quality data collected by Gitanyow Fisheries Authority and the Gitanyow Lax’yip Guardians. The standards represent annual maximum criteria that will require the development of site-specific, seasonally representative standards for specific project proposals.

Finally, Gitanyow recognize that climate change will make some waterbodies less suitable for fish and others more suitable. Therefore, they are working towards a high degree of protection for both types of waterbodies.

Conclusion

The integrated approach taken by the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs is creating a watershed governance approach based in the Gitanyow legal order expressed in a contemporary form to address 21^st century water management challenges, including climate change.

Led by the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs, the Huwilp is creating a comprehensive understanding of the ecological health of our territory using both Indigenous knowledge and laws (Ayookxw) and western science, and translating that knowledge into policies that respond to the impacts of climate change.

This case study highlights the interconnectedness of climate change and water management, and the significant risks facing species of cultural significance that Indigenous peoples rely upon. Land use plans are foundational to addressing the cumulative effects of industrial development, providing spatial zones that highlight environmental values common to both Crown and Indigenous governments. However, climate change calls for greater conservation and management specificity around water management, in order to connect land and water planning in an integrated and holistic manner.

Recommendations

For Indigenous governing organizations:

Develop or adapt watershed/land use plans based on your Indigenous legal orders that specifically assess climate change impacts and risks, including environmental flow needs;
Consider how governance instruments like policies or governance processes can address constraints and opportunities related to climate change;
Declare your environmental flow needs publicly as a statement of your Indigenous laws;
Require state governments and proponents to provide details on how proposed projects will exacerbate climate change impacts and how they will mitigate those impacts.

For Indigenous and settler watershed managers:

Gather Indigenous knowledge on ecological baselines in your territory, in particular water quality and flow;
Continue to formally document the existing climate change impacts your community is experiencing. Consider reporting to leadership these impacts in an annual report or state of the territory report;
Establish ecological monitoring programs that include both Indigenous knowledge and western science methodologies;
Monitor the impacts of existing activities in the territory and evaluate proposed activities using a climate change screen.
Consider how future projected climate change will impact water and ecological resources, and plan for these in management strategies.

For Crown governments:

Incorporate climate change screens and assessment criteria into all land use and water management planning and approvals processes;
Revise land use and water management parameters, such as orders under forestry legislation, to account for territory-specific anticipated climate change impacts;
Enter into consent-based agreements with all First Nations or Indigenous governing organizations for all planning and approvals processes that enable adaptive assessment, monitoring and evaluation processes for cumulative impacts—including from climate change— throughout a territory;
Fund community-led data gathering, monitoring and assessment using both Indigenous and western scientific knowledge;
Create an interactive and public data management platform that will house non-confidential data on which all parties can rely.

About the authors

Tara Marsden holds the name Naxginkw and is a member of the Gitanyow Huwilp and acted as Wilp Sustainability Director for the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs for nine years. Deborah Curran is a lawyer with the Environmental Law Centre and professor at the University of Victoria and co-writes in allyship, therefore the article is written in first-person.

References

The Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11.

Gitanyow Fisheries Authority (Kevin Koch and Jeffrey Anderson). 2018. Hanna, Tintina and Strohn Creeks Habitat Assessment and Restoration Initiative Year 4.

Gitanyow Nation and Province of British Columbia. 2016. Gitanyow Huwilp Recognition and Reconciliation Agreement.

Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs. 2021. Gitanyow Lax’yip Water Policy (Draft).

Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs. 2009. Gitanyow Constitution.

Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs. Legal Principles Underlying the Gitanyow Lax’yip Land Use Plan.

Gitanyow Huwilp Society. 2018. Gitanyow Lax’yip Water Quantity and Quality Plan: Scoping Document and Proposed Framework Phase 1 Scoping Document.

Matthew J. Beedle, PhD and Monica Jeffrey. 2020. Meziadin Lake Watershed and Gitanyow Lax’yip Inventory.

Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. Preliminary Strategic Climate Risk Assessment for British Columbia 2019.

Unnatural Disasters

Published as part of our Indigenous Perspectives series featuring Indigenous-led initiatives to address and respond to climate change.

Summary

Indigenous communities in Canada face disproportionate levels of risk from climate change—but not only from climate change. In Canada, there is very little research within the Indigenous context on the connections between the unnatural disasters of colonialism, land dispossession, and climate displacement. Through community-led research, we seek to document in this case study the long-term impacts of land dispossession, disaster displacement, and climate change in Siksika Nation, on Treaty 7 territory in southern Alberta, through interviews conducted with community members by Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro, a Siksika Elder.

Following the devastating 2013 flood event, Siksika evacuees experienced multiple phases of disaster displacement. Six long years after the disaster, some of the evacuees had not returned to their homes. Recovery has been an ongoing process with uncertain outcomes.

In June 2013, eight communities along the Bow River, which ﬂows west to east within the Siksika Nation, were devastated by a ﬂood.

Through this case study, we challenge the widely used notion of a “natural disaster.” When examined from an Indigenous community perspective, and bearing in mind targeted long-term risk creation through colonial land dispossession combined with anthropogenic climate change, there is very little that is “natural” about flooding disasters in First Nation communities.

Our case study shows an example of self-determination in the community-led, culturally safe response to disasters of the Dancing Deer Disaster Recovery Centre, a unique Siksika-led disaster recovery approach that addressed the physical, mental, cultural, and spiritual health needs of evacuees.

Introduction

The frequency and severity of disasters has been increasing over the past 30 years in Canada. In 2020 alone, insured damage for severe weather events across Canada reached $2.4 billion (IBC, 2021). Such floods, hurricanes and wildfires are often presented by the media, government, and response organizations as “natural disasters.” However, this notion of a “natural” disaster fails to tell the full story of the social determinants of risk and how disasters are exacerbated through inappropriate land use, fragmented governance systems, and activities prioritizing short-term gain and short-term electoral benefits (Lavell & Maskrey, 2013; Oliver-Smith et al., 2016). In particular, the “natural disaster” framing omits the ongoing unnatural disasters of denial, displacement, dispossession, and loss in Indigenous communities (Howitt, 2020; Howitt et al, 2012).

In this case study, we examine the unnatural impacts colonization continues to have on communities as they recover from disasters. Specifically, through community-led research, we document the long-term impacts of land dispossession, disaster displacement, and climate change in Siksika Nation based on interviews conducted with community members by Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro. Darlene is a Siksika Elder, a former community nurse, the former Chief, and the Former Director of the Dancing Deer Disaster Recovery Centre. It is also based on Darlene’s reflections as a community leader.

Our research and writing team for this case study also included Emily Dicken, MSc, PhD, a woman of mixed Indigenous and European descent with over 15 years of experience working in the field of emergency management, and Lilia Yumagulova, MSc, PhD, a Bashkir woman with over 15 years of global experience in Indigenous community resilience. Our team met through the Advisory Circle for the Preparing Our Home program, an Indigenous youth-led program for community resilience.

Grounded in Indigenous methodologies, this community case study sought to create a culturally safe space to explore colonial land dispossession and disaster evacuations within the context of climate displacement. Climate change is projected to continue to drive increased risks over the coming decades, risks that will be compounded by non-climatic factors such as social, economic, cultural, political, and institutional inequities (IPCC, 2016). It is important to understand how disaster response and emergency planning measures can play a role in reducing harm and promoting healing instead of perpetuating vulnerabilities and inequities.

_{Disaster response and emergency planning measures can play a role in reducing harm and promoting healing instead of perpetuating vulnerabilities and inequities.}

Our case study highlights the long journey home for Siksika evacuees who have been dealing with the long-term physical and mental health consequences of displacement, loss, and trauma. In this long journey, we focus on highlighting best practices of Indigenous self-determination in disaster recovery. These include providing culturally appropriate, community member-led services to address the physical, mental, spiritual, and emotional needs of evacuees throughout disaster displacement.

The unnatural disasters of colonialism and displacement

Indigenous Peoples have lived on the land now known as Canada since time immemorial. However, the past 400 years of colonization in Canada can be understood as a political ideology that legitimated the modern European invasion, occupation, and exploitation of inhabited Indigenous lands and devastated Indigenous culture (Coates, 2004). To meet the perceived economic and political needs of imperial powers, colonization was rationalized as a way to bring Christianity and ‘civilization’ to Indigenous Peoples by universalizing a specific set of European beliefs and values (Deloria, 1969; Howe, 2003; McMillan & Yellowhorn, 2004).

The enduring and unnatural disaster of colonialism in Canada has been catastrophic for Indigenous Peoples. Rapid depopulation and pervasive forms of physical, mental, and social abuse contributed to substantial losses of identity, language, cultural practice, spiritual belief, and territory (Howitt et al., 2011). As a mechanism for furthering the dispossession of Indigenous Peoples, in 1876, the federal government of Canada developed the Indian Act, bringing a coordinated approach to ‘Indian policy’. With the intent of assimilation—the erasure of Indigenous Peoples as distinct nations—the priorities of the Indian Act addressed three main areas of legislation: land, membership, and local government (Morris, 1880; Reading and Wien, 2009). As explained by Duncan Campbell Scott, Indian Affairs Deputy Minister from 1913 to 1932, “our objective is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic, and there is no Indian question, and no Indian Department, that is the whole objective of this bill” (TRCC, 2015, p. 54).

For Indigenous Peoples in Canada, colonialism represents a painful chronicle of broken treaties, stolen lands, Indian residential schools, and the Indian Act. Of vital note to this case study is the way the Indian Act undermined the ability of Indigenous communities to self-govern and gave the federal government the authority to strip the power of chiefs and councillors and overturn decisions made by band councils. As the legislation became further entrenched, the government also began to assume greater authority over how reserve lands could be allocated (Reading & Wien, 2009; TRCC, 2015). Under this paternalistic approach, entire reserves were relocated against the will of communities.

Forced relocation disrupted Indigenous settlement patterns that accommodated seasonal opportunities and hazards (e.g., winter villages were often located in areas of refuge from winter storms and other seasonal hazards). Traditionally, many Indigenous communities lived in multiple settlement sites that were utilized at different times of the year (Dicken, 2017). The selection of these sites was dependent on seasonal hunting and fishing practices and environmental factors such as weather and access to fresh water. Through the Reserve section of the Indian Act, however, communities were forced to settle and remain in one location. Although many Indigenous communities did not surrender their land, through federal legislation the Canadian government created small reserves for each community in the late 19^th century. By limiting access to land, this act also curtailed hunting and fishing, which essentially deprived Indigenous Peoples of food security and economic viability.

Today, much of the reserve land across Canada is exposed to and experiences a disproportionate level of risk and hazards compared to their neighbouring non-Indigenous communities, and lacks the flood protection infrastructure such as dikes needed to mitigate this risk (Yumagulova, 2020). This is due to historical and present-day complexities associated with lack of infrastructure, marginalized lands, and other socio-economic factors (OAGC, 2013). The establishment of reserves caused land displacement (the forced relocation from and the loss of traditional lands, and/or loss of access to traditional lands) and environmental dispossession (the process through which traditional access to the resources of the environment is reduced though displacement, environmental contamination, unprecedented resource extraction, or land rights disputes), both of which are detrimental to the health and wellness of Indigenous communities (Lewis et al, 2020).

Disproportionate levels of risk in Indigenous communities

First Nation communities are 18 times more likely to be evacuated due to disasters than people living off-reserve and fire-related death is more than 10 times higher (Government of Canada, 2019). Disaster displacement impacts are further compounded due to gaps in emergency management practices such as lack of evacuation preparedness (Asfaw et al., 2020) and insurance gaps (Public Safety Canada, 2020); meanwhile, lack of self-determination in disaster response can result in externally imposed emergency management practices, further deepening marginalization, trauma, and conflict within communities (Yumagulova et al, 2019a). More than a fifth of residential properties on Indigenous reserves are exposed to risks of one-in-a-hundred-year flooding (Thistlethwaite et al, 2020). Inadequate housing further exacerbates social vulnerability: the proportion of First Nations people with registered or treaty Indian status who lived in a dwelling that needed major repairs was more than three times higher on reserve (44.2%) than off reserve (14.2%) (Statistics Canada, 2016). For more information, see Yumagulova, Yellow Old Woman-Munro, MacLean-Hawes, Naveau, Vogel, 2021.

Through disasters such as flood and fire, standard emergency management practices can inadvertently bring about forced evacuation or relocation for the purposes of public safety. Both evacuation and relocation negatively impact community resilience and can cause irreparable damage to members of Indigenous communities when they become separated from their traditional lands (Howitt et al., 2012). Forced evacuation, in concert with colonial legacies associated with loss of land, speaks to the urgent need for pre-disaster recovery planning that supports the cultural needs of Indigenous Peoples, informed by both historical and present-day needs.

_{First Nation communities are 18 times more likely to be evacuated due to disasters than people living off-reserve.}

Shaped by Canadian history and entrenched in present day society, colonialism remains an ongoing process, with continuous influence on both the structure and the quality of the relationship between Canadian settlers and Indigenous Peoples. To explore the experiences of colonial displacement from land and the present and future state of climate impacts, we draw on lessons from the flooding of the Siksika Nation and the wisdom with which they have responded and recovered.

Climate change and disaster displacement

Climate change presents unique challenges for Indigenous Peoples, exacerbated by historical and ongoing processes of land dispossession. Climate change can further exacerbate political and economic marginalization, loss of land and resources, human rights violations, discrimination, and unemployment (International Labour Organization, 2017). Indigenous communities in Canada are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change due to Indigenous People’s intrinsic connection to and reliance on their traditional territories (e.g., for sustenance through rights to hunt and fish), remoteness in relation to access to essential services, infrastructure deficits, and exposure to climate risks (CIER, 2009; CIER, 2020). Both disaster and climate displacement present unique challenges for Indigenous Peoples given their dependence upon, spiritual connections to, and identity-forming relationship with the land—a relationship grounded in intergenerational place attachment that extends over millennia (Middleton et al, 2020). Evidence collected by Indigenous scholars and community members suggests that even well-intentioned emergency management practices, if externally imposed and culturally unsafe, can further deepen marginalization, trauma, and conflict within communities, exacerbating disaster impacts and pre-existing vulnerabilities (Yumagulova et al, 2019a; CIER, 2019). And the urgent need to adapt to climate change can resurface previous traumas for some Indigenous Peoples (Middleton et al, 2020).

The history of Siksika Nation

The Siksika Nation is located 87 kilometres southeast of Calgary and is the second-largest Indigenous reserve in Canada with a land area of 696.54 square kilometres and a total population of over 7,500. The Siksika are a part of the Blackfoot Confederacy, which also includes the Piikani and Kainaiwa of southern Alberta and the Blackfeet in the State of Montana (Siksika Nation, 2020a). The traditional Blackfoot territory includes northern Montana and North Dakota, and extends north as far as Edmonton in Alberta and Prince Albert in Saskatchewan (see maps).

Traditionally, Iiníí (Buffalo in Blackfoot language) was the way of life for the Blackfoot as a source of sustenance and spirituality. Iiníí took care of the Blackfoot Peoples by providing lodging, clothing, and food. It was the foundation of spiritual and social relationships and it guided the nomadic Blackfoot Peoples across their vast traditional territories. Families were central to the Siksika way of life and extended family systems nurtured shared responsibility. Traditional governance and leadership roles included such prerequisites as the individual’s capacity to share and care for all people, especially the very young and the aged (Siksika Nation, 2020b).

Prior to the 1800s, the Siksika Government structure was made up of 36 clans with a total population of 18,000. By 1890, the North Blackfoot population had been decimated by the introduction of disease from Europe, falling to approximately 600 to 800 members (Siksika Nation, 2020b).

In 1877, Isapo-muxika (Chief Crowfoot), the legendary leader of the Siksika, signed Treaty 7, which forced the Siksika to a reserve at Blackfoot Crossing, east of Calgary (Siksika Nation, 2020b). The nomadic way of life was forever changed and some Siksika members became farmers, ranchers, and coal miners on the reserve (Dempsey, 2019).

Reserves ended traditional ways of life. The Blackfoot Confederacy struggled to survive on reserves without the ability to hunt buffalo. The winter of 1883–84, the “starvation winter,” brought widespread hunger (Siksika Nation, 2020b; Dempsey, 2019).

In 1910, facing pressure from the federal government and developers, the Siksika surrendered a significant portion of their reserve for sale, an agreement that was detrimental to the Nation. The funds were held in trust by the government for administering the construction of new homes and other activities on reserve (Dempsey, 2019).

*Siksika lands. Photos supplied by Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro.*

The modern day Siksika Peoples continue to advocate for autonomy and self-government that is rooted in the land. The traditional territory and its diverse land had many uses for the Blackfoot Peoples. For example, the Miistukskoowa located within the area now known as Banff National Park were part of the Blackfoot’s traditional territory used for winter camps and harvest of timber for tipis. In 1908, the land was taken from the Siksika without consent or proper compensation. The Castle Mountain Settlement, reached in 2017, provided financial compensation, economic opportunities inside the park, and ongoing access to the land for Siksika Peoples (Government of Canada, 2017). It took 57 years to settle the agreement. Under the settlement, the Siksika Nation has the option to purchase on the open market up to 17,491 acres of land outside of the boundaries of Banff National Park and apply to Canada to have the lands added to its reserve (Government of Canada, 2017).

The 2013 flood disaster in Siksika Nation

In June 2013, eight communities along the Bow River, which ﬂows west to east within the Siksika Nation, were devastated by a ﬂood. Two main bridges and 171 homes were damaged by the ﬂood, with over 1,000 people displaced from their homes (Yumagulova et al., 2019a). Recovery has been an ongoing process, with some of the community members still displaced from their home at the time of the interviews (spring-summer 2019), six and a half years after the event. To describe the long-term impacts of the flood on the community, we draw on Darlene’s reflections as the Director for Dancing Deer Disaster Recovery Centre and community interviews conducted by Darlene with the flood evacuees six years after the disaster (Yumagulova, Yellow Old Woman-Munro, Dicken, 2019b).

Environmental and land-use changes have brought new flood risks to Siksika. There is no historical record or living memory of a flood disaster of similar magnitude on Siksika lands. As Siksika Elder Darlene reflected:

“My mother would say the biggest event prior to this flood was around 1948. The community, my parents and other families lived along the river, it was in the spring, and my mother had told me they had big icebergs flowing right through the communities. In those days, we had cabins or smaller homes so the icebergs that floated overland totally destroyed some homes. All they could do was to move up the hill, which wasn’t too far from their home, but they were devastated to see their homes, in those days too, get destroyed. But since the 40s there was nothing major, as far as flooding. And everybody went back to living in the valleys, including us.”

Over the coming decades, climate change is projected to further increase the frequency and magnitude of flooding across Alberta (Zhang et al., 2019).

A long road home: Five phases of disaster displacement

Phase 1: Initial response from evacuees – confusion and makeshift housing (June 21–end of June, 2013)

Immediately following the flooding on June 21, 2013, evacuees lived in tents, RV’s, teepees and makeshift shacks close to the community they fled due to the flood, and due to the lack of adequate lodging and infrastructure in the area. Many people did not want to leave their homes unattended due to incidents of looting, and as a result, sought refuge as close to their homes as possible. This initial time was described as deeply challenging by the majority of the evacuees who lost their homes. As a single parent with children with disabilities described:

“It was my sanctuary, my home…where I raised my children; the only thing I had was my vehicle and what we could pack in the vehicle and then we left, so we had to start all over. The most difficult was seeing all the people and our — as a Nation, lose what was personal to them, you know; a place to lay their head, a roof over their home, how to provide with their food and how to provide on a day-to-day basis…people didn’t understand where to go, or when to go, what to do.”

Phase 2: Hotel lodging and gaps in access to services (July–August, 2013)

Inclement weather following the flood meant that evacuees had to move to hotels. Once the flooding subsided, additional supports started to arrive; however, the information about the supports that became available following the flood did not reach those who needed them the most. Sometimes this information was only shared through social media, a platform that was challenging to access for Elders and the chronically ill. For others it was family members that brought them the information.

The impacts of losing a home were particularly hard for single parents who had children with special needs due to the children’s difficulty understanding the complexities of relocation and loss of home. As a single parent with a teenager with Down syndrome described:

“…[they are] non-verbal so [they are] used to a lot of structure. [The flood] threw us out of our routine, our daily routine, our daily living life, and it was stressful …when we were coming ‘home’, we had no home to come to, so it was tougher for [them] to understand. [They] did take it hard, wanting to come home but I had to explain ‘No, we’re going to stay over here for now’. I wasn’t able to have an ATCO trailer home just because I was away for school [off reserve], when I came back, they were all full. Thank God I had family that opened their doors towards us and took us in for the time that we were out of a home.”

Phase 3: ATCO trailers (September 2013–2015)

As part of the recovery process, evacuees were moved from hotels to ATCO trailers (modular mobile office trailers often used as temporary accommodations for resource industry workers) at three different sites. All of the trailers were used and had numerous issues that made them unsuitable for families and children. Problems included unreliable heating, no cooking was permitted in the units, there were no refrigerators to store food, and there were no retrofits available for people with mobility challenges or special needs. Each unit had one small double bed, a place to hang coats and jackets, a small dresser, a washroom, and a television in each room.

*ATCO trailers. Photo supplied by Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro.*

Community members found the environment very controlled and made complaints such as, “It is like residential school all over again, regimental environment,” and “My children are not safe, their rooms are down the hallway therefore we must constantly ensure they are safe.” There were curfews, and security check-ins each time they left and returned to the ATCO sites. One interviewee said, “I just felt like I’m in prison there, so I get up in the mornings, I eat and then I’m gone maybe till supper or sometime then I go back.”

A single parent who was displaced expressed concern that the ATCO trailers were not suitable for people with disabilities. Some of the highly vulnerable members of the community had to move off-reserve to accommodate the special needs that were not being met in temporary housing, which further displaced them from their home community and removed them from services that were being provided.

“We couldn’t go in [ATCO trailers] because my son is in a wheelchair, so we ended up in Strathmore. We kind of moved from [one motel] to the other one there next to it. Then they couldn’t accommodate us because there was no elevator there. So, we finally ended up at [another motel]. We were actually there for almost a year and a half… For a while there, my kids were being transported by Siksika disability, until the Board of Education couldn’t do it anymore because they said we were off the reserve… So, Disabilities took over and they started taking my kids to school.”

Phase 4: New Temporary Neighbourhoods (Starting June 2016)

After approximately 18 months at the ATCO sites, two-thirds of the community members affected by the flood (in total, 771 people were forced into temporary housing (Jarvie, 2016)) were moved again to the New Temporary Neighborhoods (“NTN’s”). Their new housing was again trailers and again identified as substandard quality. In the NTN’s, one service provider identified an increase in substance abuse and vandalism:

“[the evacuees] were highly monitored in the ATCO trailers, because of security guards and people would be asked to leave if they were caught drinking. But once they moved into the trailers, it just seemed like – people were already struggling with alcohol, and it became worse. And you started to see lots of other stuff surface: violence, the vandalism.”

The vandalized NTNs further reduced the housing stock available: “[Of the] 120 NTNs that came, about 30 of them were vandalized so no one’s living in [them] right now.”

The trailers brought a strong feeling of isolation for families and communities. Some of the families only stayed in NTNs for a few months as the larger families got split apart. As a result, managing and paying for utilities became unaffordable for many families:

“You’ve got to remember that some of these families—we could have had four families in one house, and when the flood hit those families in that one house, those three other families got their own unit. And when they got their own unit, some of them were ‘this is the first time I’m on my own, I am now responsible for the home’ and they couldn’t maintain that.”

As of June 2016, only 13 new permanent homes had been built, while more than 600 people were still living with family, friends, temporarily repaired houses, or in one of the 144 NTN trailers (Patrick, 2017).

Phase 5: Still searching for home after disaster displacement (Starting in 2017)

At the time of the interviews, it had been six years since the flood, yet the journey home was still ongoing for some evacuees. Some evacuees had moved back into their old homes, other families were still moving into their new houses. For some of the evacuees that lost their homes and had to move off reserve to accommodate special needs of vulnerable family members, returning to the community was a challenge: “We’re not on the map on the reserve, so they’re having a hard time relocating all the people that moved.”

Some of the evacuees that were eventually able to return to their homes noted significant mould, flooded basements, and drinking water issues following the flood. Numerous house deficiencies had to be fixed after the flood: “They had moved into their new home [and] the water was not tested right and so they had to be retested and the water lines had to be re-dug, because they didn’t do the proper testing.”

For others, moving into their new homes took a long six and a half years following the flood. Due to poor workmanship, most of these community members are experiencing issues with their new homes. These continuing challenges include windows installed backwards, stairways that do not meet the code and houses built without wood stoves meaning a cost-intensive transition over to electric baseboards.

Although flood waters have long receded and new housing is available, disruptions to sense of place and of home have not gone away. This speaks to the importance of understanding what “returning home” really means and of the trauma and grief that is bound within the impacts of climate-related disasters.

Reflections from an Elder: What we have lost due to the disaster

The flood disaster further dispossessed the community of land, culture, sense of safety, and traditional ways of life.

Loss of land: It is estimated that a quarter of the Siksika land base has been lost or is now uninhabitable due to the flood. There were three communities that were affected by the flooding, about a thousand homes, and many families. Darlene reflected that most community members are not happy where they are now. In one community, the community members did not have any input into their relocation and recovery: decisions were made by the disaster recovery committee and the leadership regarding where the communities would be located. She identified that every time there is a disaster, more people are being moved into smaller areas where there remains a potential and risk for other disasters to occur.

Loss of sense of safety: A major highway runs through Siksika lands, so when post-flood community rebuilding occurred, the disaster recovery committee used the road as the central infrastructure to rebuild the community around. This choice has resulted in further trauma to the communities, as Darlene reflects on the many deaths that have occurred along the highway. She further states, “the individuals who agreed to build more houses did not negotiate to ensure the highway was safe for children and people who didn’t have transportation and walk down that highway. Darlene believes Siksika leadership is in negotiations with Alberta Transportation to install lights and post reduced speed limit signs. But for many families, there is the reality of compounding grief, trauma, and loss as several community members have been killed on that highway by semi-trucks, many of which were not adhering to speed limits. The current speed limits through the community are set at 80 km/hr, but Darlene identified that the community is advocating for further reductions, so semi-trucks and other vehicles do not speed through the community. This shows that the recovery process can introduce further risks through rebuilding, especially when the options for relocation sites are limited.

The trauma of disaster: The trauma of disaster carried on long after the flood waters subsided, especially for the children, as shared by one of the interviewees: “When vehicles drive by, [the grandparents, parents and grandchildren] hear a rumbling. Is that the river coming through the trees? We would jump up and look out at night with a flashlight, just to see if water was coming again. And [children] would have all these continuous dreams of flooding again and that fear of the flood coming through.” In interview after interview, community members spoke of re-traumatization, fear of the unknown, increased stress levels due to the need to pack up and move belongings, feelings of loss each time they moved, depression, sadness, and loss of income due to employment disruptions during displacement.

Loss of access to traditional medicines and foods due to contamination of water, soil, and silting: The flood also caused contamination of water and soil. This resulted in reduced access to traditional seasonal foods and medicines, especially for the elderly, who relied on these medicines for their well-being. As one service provider suggested: “Seasonal harvests – the berries, the mints, and the medicines – some of the people that would pick in these areas didn’t want to pick anymore. They didn’t know how long they were to wait. Someone told them they should wait five years, but people were still scared.” As climate change contributes to more frequent and severe flooding across the Siksika territory, this disruption to accessing traditional medicines and food will have devastating cultural consequences.

Several interviewees also raised their concerns about contaminated soils that the new sites were built on. As Darlene shared:

“The one community which is referred to as Washington, they lived in a valley on the east end along the Bow River. The newly built Washington community members were moved onto land that was previously farmland, and we all know that the farmers sprayed onto the fields. My biggest concern is, how could they move this whole community on land that is possibly contaminated. There’s been evidence of that in our community before where houses were built on farmland and those families had died from cancer. They did not remove the topsoil; they just built their houses right on the existing soil. There are a lot of environmental issues that nobody pays attention to, we need to teach our youth regarding possible contaminants within our community and possible disasters due to climate change.”

Loss of home community and traditional way of life: It was not only homes that were lost in the flood, but entire communities and a way of life. Some of the evacuees engaged in a peaceful protest over the relocation process that did not consider their concerns. Led by Ben Crow Chief, the community members established a blockade of a new permanent housing subdivision near an existing NTN that lasted over 226 days (Jarvie, 2016). The community members wanted to reside on traditional clan lands or near where they had lived before in low-lying flood prone areas. A band member (who declined to be named for fear of loss of work on the reserve) commented in Aitsiniki, Siksika Nation’s newspaper: “When you create these big subdivisions with people living on top of each other, that’s when you have all the social problems. This is not how we traditionally live (Jarvie, 2016).” Concerns about crime and disrupted clan structures were also raised (Jarvie, 2016; Patrick, 2017).

Self-determination and disaster recovery

Cultural continuity, or “being who we are,” and self-determination, or “being a self-sufficient Nation” (Oster et al, 2015), are foundational to Indigenous community resilience. Several key cultural continuity initiatives connected the evacuees to their culture, serving as their ‘home’ by creating culturally safe spaces throughout the phases of displacement.

Historically, the Siksika way of life for families, friends, and neighbours can be summarized in a Blackfoot word ispommitaa (help out, assist). Ispommitaa connects members of the community with each other, revitalising co-operative cultural traditions and creating a sense of belonging through participation in shared events and through crises (Yumagulova et al, 2019a). These Indigenous community-held values became the foundation of flood recovery and community care throughout the displacement.

*Dancing Deer Disaster Recovery Centre staff. Photo supplied by Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro.*

One particularly unique Siksika organization, the Dancing Deer Disaster Recovery Centre (DDDRC), focused on “rebuilding families and communities through hope and healing” (Siksika Nation, 2014). The Centre consisted of a multi-disciplinary group of Siksika professionals, youth, and a Siksika traditional Elder. The team assisted the evacuees on their journey to recovery by providing culturally safe supports and services for physical, mental, and social well-being. The diverse professional background, experience, and knowledge of this team ensured that the multiple needs of the evacuees were addressed in one place, as a centralized service, instead of having to visit multiple departments. The other unique feature was that the team provided these services within the temporary housing of the evacuees, thus serving as a critical link for cultural continuity between the community and changing housing locations of the evacuees. An Indigenous service provider stressed the importance of this ability to meet people where they were at:

“Meeting the people in their own homes, their temporary situations, temporary housing, hotel or trailers…it allowed for a lot more trust building that people would be willing to open their doors to you, to be able to be seen in that situation, you know? I think it was more of a cultural thing. It’s like, you went home – you went to visit these people in their homes. Rather than them seeing you as a psychologist or as a professional coming to do counselling, they saw me more as somebody coming in to visit and checking in on them. In a much safer, non-intrusive way, you know?”

Meeting the evacuees in their temporary homes and proactively delivering services based on established trust and relationship by Blackfoot-speaking professionals was a culturally safe practice that met the needs of the most vulnerable (such as elderly, chronically ill, and children with disabilities).

*Siksika children’s feelings in a disaster. Photo supplied by Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro.*

By being the boots and the eyes on the ground, the centre staff were able to respond to community-identified gaps in recovery such as the impacts of disaster displacement on children. Throughout the early phases of displacement, there were reports of children misbehaving in schools, exhibiting anger through the destruction of property at the ATCO sites, and later at the NTNs. In collaboration with Save the Children, training on assessment and appropriate activities for children who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was provided to the various youth workers within Siksika. DDDRC youth commenced youth programs at the three ATCO sites such as art therapy, cultural craft (making hand drums), parfleche (buffalo hide) bags, and outdoor activities in the spring and summer to pick and identify various medicinal plants and berries. The programs continued for two to three years into recovery as the DDDRC changed locations.

*Children’s activities during displacement. Photos supplied by Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro*

By providing culturally appropriate, community member-led services to address the physical, mental, and social needs of evacuees throughout the various phases of displacement, DDDRC serves as a model of self-determination in a post-disaster recovery context that could be used in other Indigenous communities.

Listen to Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro reflect on her flood recovery experience

Conclusions

The Siksika case study shows the disproportionate impact of climate change on Indigenous communities due to climatic and non-climatic factors (social, economic, cultural, political, and institutional inequities).

This case study acknowledges that disasters and climate change impacts in Indigenous communities need to be understood within the context of targeted risk creation through colonial and racist policies of land dispossession, cultural erasure, and destructive actions such as the residential school system and the Indian Act.

The stories shared by Siksika evacuees shows that disaster displacement has multiple stages, and that recovery is an ongoing process with uncertain outcomes. Six long years after the disaster, some of the evacuees had not returned to their homes, while many others did not feel safe in their new homes and experienced fear and increased stress due to inclement weather (e.g., increased rain, wind, and wildfires).

Through this case study we challenge a widely used notion of a “natural disaster.” When examined from an Indigenous community perspective, and bearing in mind targeted long-term risk creation through colonial land dispossession combined with anthropogenic climate change, there is very little that is “natural” about flooding disasters in First Nation communities.

Our case study shows examples of wise practices for community-led and culturally safe responses to disasters through the Dancing Deer Disaster Recovery Centre. It is evident that community organizations engaged with long-term Indigenous-led disaster recovery can address the gaps in supporting physical, mental, cultural and spiritual health needs of displaced Indigenous peoples.

This case study is in part based on Yumagulova L, Yellow Old Woman-Munro D, Dicken E. (2019b) report titled “Honouring the Voices of Long-Term Evacuees Following Natural Disasters in Ashcroft Indian Band and Siksika Nation”. Data for this project was collected under University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board HS22640 (H20019:096) “Long-term Public Health Responses to Evacuation Due to Natural Disaster in Canada.” Production of this report was possible in part due to a financial contribution from the National Collaborating Centres for Public Health. The views herein do not necessarily represent the views of the NCCs or the Public Health Agency of Canada.

About the authors

Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro is a Siksika Elder born and raised on the Siksika Nation; she is the oldest of 10 children. Darlene has served her community through many roles as a community nurse, Treaty 7 Zone Director, Medical Services Branch and Chief. In 2013, Darlene came out semi-retirement to assist Siksika Nation with the flood disaster as a night shift volunteer and became Manager of Dancing Deer Disaster Recovery Program and Project Manager for Community Wellness (Psychosocial) Recovery Program.

Dr. Lilia Yumagulova is a Bashkir woman with degrees in engineering and risk analysis and a PhD in resilience planning. Lilia’s passion is in building community resilience to climate change and disasters. With over 20 years of work experience with government, NGOs, media, Indigenous communities and supranational organizations in Europe and North America, Lilia is the Program Director for the Preparing Our Home Program that empowers Indigenous youth leadership in community resilience.

As an Indigenous scholar and practitioner in Emergency Management, Dr. Emily Dicken has over 15 years of experience and has held roles in organizations such as North Shore Emergency Management, First Nations Health Authority and Emergency Management BC. Across all areas of her work, Emily seeks to understand colonialism as an unnatural and enduring disaster impacting Indigenous communities. When not working, Emily can be found enjoying time in the Coast Mountains with her husband Jeff and their two young sons, Keegan and Bowen.

References

Asfaw, H.W., et al. 2020. “Indigenous Elders’ Experiences, Vulnerabilities and Coping during Hazard Evacuation: The Case of the 2011 Sandy Lake First Nation Wildfire Evacuation.” Society and Natural Resources: 33(10), pp. 1273–1291. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2020.1745976

Centre for Indigenous Environmental Resources, CIER. 2009. Climate Risks and Adaptive Capacity in Aboriginal Communities. http://www.yourcier.org/climate-risks-and-adaptive-capacity-in-aboriginal-communities-an-assessment-south-of-60-2009.html

CIER. 2019. Gathering for Health and Cultural Safety During Evacuations. Prepared for Indigenous Services Canada.

CIER. 2020. Climate Change Adaptation Planning Toolkit for Indigenous Communities.

http://www.yourcier.org/climate-change-adaptation-planning-toolkit-for-indigenous-communities.html

Coates, K. 2004. A Global History of Indigenous Peoples. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Dicken, E. 2017. Informing Disaster Resilience through a Nuu-chah-nulth Way of Knowing. University of Victoria. Retrieved from https://dspace.library.uvic.ca/bitstream/handle/1828/8935/Dicken_Emily_PhD_2017.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Deloria, V., Jr. 1969. Custer died for your sins: An Indian manifesto. New York: Macmillan.

Dempsey, H. 2019. “Siksika (Blackfoot).” In The Canadian Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/blackfoot-siksika

Government of Canada. 2017. Canada and the Siksika Nation Advance Reconciliation with Signing of Castle Mountain Settlement. https://www.canada.ca/en/indigenous-northern-affairs/news/2017/01/canada-siksika-nation-advance-reconciliation-signing-castle-mountain-settlement.html

Government of Canada. 2019. “Budget: GBA+: Chapter 3.” Redressing Past Wrongs and Advancing Self-Determination.

Howe, S. 2003. Empire: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.

Howitt, R., Havnen, O., & Veland, S. 2012. “Natural and Unnatural Disasters: Responding with Respect for Indigenous Rights and Knowledge.” Geographical Research. 50(1): 47-59.

Howitt, R. 2020. “Unsettling the taken (for granted).” Progress in human geography, 44(2), 193-215.

Insurance Bureau of Canada. 2021. “Severe Weather Caused $2.4 Billion in Insured Damage in 2020.”

http://www.ibc.ca/on/resources/media-centre/media-releases/severe-weather-caused-$2-4-billion-in-insured-damage-in-2020

International Labour Organization. 2017. Indigenous peoples and climate change: From victims to change agents through decent work. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—dgreports/—gender/documents/publication/wcms_551189.pdf

IPCC. [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full_wcover.pdf

Jarvie, M. 2016. “Siksika Members Still Waiting for a Home Three Years After the Flood.” Aitsiniki—Siksika Nation’s Newspaper. Vol. 25 Issue 6. P. 3.

Lavell, A., & Maskrey, A. 2014. “The future of disaster risk management.” Environmental Hazards, 13(4), 267–280. http://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2014.935282

Lewis, D., Castleden, H., Apostle, R., Francis, S., & Francis‐Strickland, K. 2020. “Linking land displacement and environmental dispossession to Mi’kmaw health and well‐being: Culturally relevant place‐based interpretive frameworks matter.” The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cag.12656

McMillan, A. & Yellowhorn, E. 2004. First Peoples in Canada. Vancouver, BC: Douglas & MacIntyre.

Middleton, J., Cunsolo, A., Jones-Bitton, A., Wright, C. J., & Harper, S. L. 2020. Indigenous mental health in a changing climate: A systematic scoping review of the global literature. Environmental Research Letters, 15(5), 053001.

Morris, A. 1880. “The Treaties of Canada.” Toronto, Canada: Belfords, Clarke & Co.

Office of the Auditor General of Canada (OAGC) (2013). Fall Report of the Auditor General of Canada. Chapter 6 – Emergency Management on Reserves. Retrieved from https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/att__e_38848.html

Oliver-Smith, A., Alcántara-Ayala, I., Burton, I., & Lavell, A. M. 2016. “Forensic investigations of disasters (FORIN): A conceptual framework and guide to research.” IRDR: Beijing. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291349173_Forensic_Investigations_of_Disasters_FORIN_a_conceptual_framework_and_guide_to_research

Oster, R. T., Grier, A., Lightning, R., Mayan, M. J., & Toth, E. L. 2014. “Cultural continuity, traditional Indigenous language, and diabetes in Alberta First Nations: a mixed methods study.” International journal for equity in health, 13(1), 1-11.

Patrick R. 2017. “Social and cultural impacts of the 2013 Bow River flood at Siksika Nation, Alberta Canada.” Indigenous Policy Journal. 28(3). http://www.indigenouspolicy.org/index.php/ipj/article/view/521/504.

Public Safety Canada. 2020. “Task Force on Flood Insurance and Relocation.” https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/mrgnc-mngmnt/dsstr-prvntn-mtgtn/tsk-frc-fld-en.aspx

Reading, C & Wien, F. 2009. Health Inequalities and Social Determinants of Aboriginal Peoples’ Health. The Senate Sub-Committee on Population Health.

Siksika Nation. 2014. Dancing Deer Disaster Recovery Centre Public Information http://siksikanation.com/wp/dancing-deer-disaster-recovery-centre-public-information/

Siksika Nation. 2020a. About Siksika Nation. http://siksikanation.com/wp/about/

Siksika Nation. 2020b. History and Culture. http://siksikanation.com/wp/history/

Statistics Canada. 2016. The housing conditions of Aboriginal people in Canada. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/as-sa/98-200-x/2016021/98-200-x2016021-eng.cfm

Thistlethwaite, J., Minano, A., Henstra, D., & Scott, D. 2020. “Indigenous Reserve Lands in Canada Face High Flood Risk. Policy Brief No. 159 — April 2020.” Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRCC). 2015. Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, Volume One: Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future. Toronto, ON: Lorimer.

Yumagulova, L., Suzanne Phibbs, Christine M. Kenney, Darlene Yellow Old Woman-Munro, Amy Cardinal Christianson, Tara K. McGee & Rosalita Whitehair. 2019a. “The role of disaster volunteering in Indigenous communities.” Environmental Hazards. DOI:10.1080/17477891.2019.1657791

Yumagulova L, Yellow Old Woman-Munro D, Dicken E. 2019b. “Honouring the Voices of Long-Term Evacuees Following Natural Disasters in Ashcroft Indian Band and Siksika Nation.” National Collaborating Centres for Public Health. May 2020. (NCCPH Internal report, unpublished).

Yumagulova, Yellow Old Woman-Munro, MacLean-Hawes, Naveau, Vogel. 2021. “Building Climate Resilience in Indigenous Communities.” Preparing Our Home. http://preparingourhome.ca/climate-resilience-in-first-nation-communities/

Yumagulova, L. 2020. “Disrupting the riskscapes of inequities: a case study of planning for resilience in Canada’s Metro Vancouver region.” Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 13(2), 293-318.

Zhang, X., Flato, G., Kirchmeier-Young, M., Vincent, L., Wan, H., Wang, X., Rong, R., Fyfe, J., Li, G., Kharin, V.V. 2019. “Changes in Temperature and Precipitation Across Canada”; Chapter 4 in Bush, E. and Lemmen, D.S. (Eds.) Canada’s Changing Climate Report. Government of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, pp 112-193.

Can Green Roofs Help Cities Respond to Climate Change?

Growing Forests in a City

Wetlands Can Be Infrastructure, Too

Clean Growth in Nova Scotia

SUMMARY

A September 2020 report from the Canadian Climate Institute identified 11 new indicators to define and measure Canada’s progress on climate change and clean growth. Drawing on a broad range of publicly available data, the report presents a vision of how Canada can prosper while addressing climate change. The 11 indicators offer data-driven insights on where Canada is making progress—and where more work needs to be done.

This case study focuses on a single province, Nova Scotia, to provide a tangible example of what clean growth means in practice, and how to measure it. Nova Scotia has significantly reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions since 2005, while maintaining steady economic growth through a combination of policy and market- driven shifts in economic structure. Yet it faces considerable challenges in making future progress. The province has set some of the most ambitious climate targets in the country, but also has one of Canada’s most emissions-intensive economies. At the same time, the province is grappling with high unemployment rates, high energy costs, and poor air quality in some areas.

This case study draws on a sub-set of the 11 indicators, focusing on the best available data—areas where it is clear that Nova Scotia has made progress and areas where more effort is needed. See the full report for more details on each of the 11 indicators.

INGREDIENTS OF CLEAN GROWTH IN NOVA SCOTIA

A fundamental objective of clean growth is separating—or decoupling—economic growth (measured by gross domestic product, or GDP) from GHG emissions. Figure 1 shows an index of Nova Scotia’s GDP, GHG emissions, and employment between 2005 and 2018.

Overall, Nova Scotia has made substantial progress on decoupling economic growth and jobs from emissions trends. Of all provinces and territories, Nova Scotia achieved the second-biggest reduction in GHG emissions between 2005 and 2018, a drop of 26 per cent (New Brunswick reduced emissions by 34 per cent). Meanwhile, provincial GDP (adjusted for inflation) increased by 14 per cent, while job growth increased by three per cent. And while these growth rates are lower than national averages (24 per cent growth in GDP and 14 per cent growth in jobs), Nova Scotia’s job growth remained consistent with population growth, and its overall unemployment levels remained stable (Statistics Canada, 2020b).

Figure 1: GDP, Employment, and GHG emissions, Nova Scotia, 2005-2018

Sources: ECCC (2020); Statistics Canada (2020a); Statistics Canada (2019).

Wages and salaries in Nova Scotia have also increased: median employment income (adjusted for inflation) rose by 22 per cent between 2005 and 2018—which represents the fourth-largest jump among provinces (Statistics Canada, 2020c).

Five drivers underpin Nova Scotia’s progress on decoupling its GHG emissions from its economy: 1) fuel switching in the electricity sector; 2) energy efficiency gains; 3) clean tech sector growth; 4) climate-related infrastructure investment; and, 5) a gradual shift toward a services-based economy and away from producing emissions-intensive goods.

1. Fuel switching in the electricity sector

In 2007, Nova Scotia generated 89 per cent of its electricity from burning fossil fuels— namely coal and oil. By 2018, the share of fossil fuels in its electricity mix fell to 65 per cent (NSP, 2020a). In particular, coal use fell from 76% of the electricity mix in 2007 to 52% in 2018, while natural gas and oil stayed stable at 13% over the period. Meanwhile, renewable electricity production grew rapidly: wind power, for example, generated 12 per cent of Nova Scotia’s electricity in 2018, up from one per cent in 2007 (NSP, 2020a). In total, the emissions intensity of Nova Scotia’s electricity grid fell from 880 grams of GHGs per kilowatt hour (kWh) in 2005 to 720 in 2018 (ECCC, 2020).

Government policy has been instrumental in this fuel switching. Nova Scotia capped the total allowable emissions from the electricity sector and implemented a renewable portfolio standard in 2010, requiring Nova Scotia Power (the single, regulated utility in the province) to increase the share of renewable power to 25 per cent by 2015 and 40 per cent by 2020. This policy was accompanied by a community feed-in tariff program, which provided subsidies for renewable power generators from 2011 to 2016. Together these policies reduced electricity emissions by 35 per cent between 2005 and 2018 (ECCC, 2020).

2. Energy efficiency gains

Continual improvement in energy efficiency is the second big reason for Nova Scotia’s success in decarbonizing its economy. Energy-saving measures cumulatively reduce about 1 million tonnes (Mt) of GHG emissions each year, equivalent to about six per cent of the province’s total 2018 emissions (ECCC, 2020; Municipality of Digby, 2020). In 2017, for example, Nova Scotia had the 10th lowest electricity consumption per capita and consumed 24 per cent less electricity per person than the national average (CER, 2020). Electricity demand has fallen seven per cent since 2005, amounting to over $180 million in energy cost savings for Nova Scotians (Efficiency One, 2019).

Here too, policy has been essential. The province established Canada’s first independent energy efficiency utility in 2009, which has spearheaded numerous initiatives. Nova Scotia became the first province, for example, to require LED bulbs in all streetlights, saving an estimated $18 million in operating and maintenance costs and 30,000 tons of GHGs per year (Government of Nova Scotia, 2012). Initiatives have also helped households adopt more efficient space-heating technologies, such as electric heat pumps; Nova Scotia now ranks third in the country for the number of heat pump installations per capita (CER, 2019). Due to these different policies, Nova Scotia now has the highest concentration of energy efficiency managers and advisors in the country (i.e., number of managers per large business) (Efficiency Canada, 2019).

Many of these initiatives have targeted Nova Scotia’s most financially vulnerable households. Nova Scotia is the third-largest spender per household on reducing energy poverty (Efficiency Canada, 2019), helping reduce heating bills by 35 per cent for participating households (Efficiency One, 2018). One program is specifically targeted at improving energy efficiency in Mi’kmaq communities and is helping improve insulation, mitigate moisture, enhance ventilation, and support heat pump installations (Efficiency One, 2020). Although the program is still relatively new, it will cover 2,400 on-reserve homes in 13 Mi’kmaq communities.

3. Clean tech sector growth

Although it currently represents just two per cent of provincial GDP, Nova Scotia’s environmental and clean technology (ECT) sector is an important source of new growth in the province. In terms of GDP, the ECT sector grew by 31 per cent between 2012 and 2018, compared to 19 per cent nationally, driven primarily by growth in clean electricity, waste management, and environment-related construction. Over this same period, jobs in the ECT sector grew by 27 per cent compared to 17 per cent nationally (Statistics Canada, 2020d).

Nova Scotia has also become a leader in exporting ECT goods and services. Between 2012 and 2018, exports in Nova Scotia’s ECT sector grew by 67 per cent, compared to 23 per cent nationally. While imports of ECT fell during this period (by 33 per cent), exports provide new opportunities for employment and economic development. Nearly one-third of Nova Scotia’s ECT exports were in complex manufactured goods (Statistics Canada, 2020e). CarbonCure, for example is a Nova Scotia-based company that manufactures a technology that introduces recycled CO2 into fresh concrete to reduce its carbon footprint. The business was recently named North America’s clean tech company of the year and is well poised to capture these growing export opportunities (Cleantech Group, 2020).

The province’s mature ecosystem of research and development has provided the foundation for its growing clean technology sector. Nova Scotia outperforms all other provinces—and many international peers—when it comes to public spending on research and development, measured as a percentage of provincial GDP (Conference Board of Canada, 2020). Its high concentration of universities also provides a reliable source of new and innovative research. Researchers at Dalhousie University, for example, have teamed up with Tesla and other industrial partners to improve lithium-ion battery storage (Jarratt, 2020). Acadia University established the Tidal Energy Institute, which is helping advance tidal energy in the Bay of Fundy. Lastly, the Verschuren Centre at the University of Cape Breton partners with industry to develop and deploy technological solutions in renewable energy, among other research areas (Verschuren Centre, 2020).

Some provincial energy policies are aimed at tapping directly into this pool of expertise. In 2015, for example, the provincial government implemented a community feed-in tariff program to help develop and commercialize tidal power technologies, contributing $420–$530/MWh for new tidal projects (Government of Nova Scotia, 2020). The provincial utility is also ramping up adoption of key technologies, such as smart meters for households, which will allow it to better integrated small-scale renewables and time-of-use pricing into the electricity system (Lau, 2020; NSP, 2020b).

Investments in climate-related infrastructure are another important factor in Nova Scotia’s success on low-carbon growth. Figure 2 shows investment flows for select infrastructure categories between 2009 and 2019. Overall, the figure shows two large injections of capital in the provincial economy, one in 2010 and the other in 2017. These bulky investments were targeted primarily at expanding and maintaining the province’s transmission and distribution infrastructure.

Nova Scotia also saw a burst of investment in renewable power generation between 2013 and 2015, driven by the province’s community feed-in-tariff program (which ended in 2016) and expansion of commercial wind turbines. Meanwhile, investments in residential solar have accelerated rapidly (not included in the figure). Installed solar capacity grew from virtually nothing in 2015 to 5.4 MW by 2018. Financial rebates through Efficiency Nova Scotia’s Solar Homes Program have helped spur this new investment, along with Property Assessed Clean Energy programs that provide households with accessible financing options for energy efficiency upgrades and solar installations (Nova Scotia PACE, 2020).

Figure 2: Investment Flows for Select Infrastructure Categories (2009-2019)

As the provincial electricity grid continues to get cleaner, this infrastructure could play a key role in decarbonizing other sectors, such as transportation (e.g., electric vehicles) and buildings (e.g., heat pumps). Nova Scotia Power, for example, is installing a fast charger network for electric vehicles from Yarmouth to Sydney, which will help facilitate trips from the south of the province to its north (NS Government, 2019). Metro Transit (the regional public transit authority for Halifax) has committed to electrifying half of its bus fleet by 2028 and plans to introduce the first electric buses by 2022–23 (Halifax Regional Council, 2020).

Improving how governments measure the value of these infrastructure investments will be critical in the future. A lack of data and analysis currently prevents us from evaluating the full range of costs and benefits associated big infrastructure investments. Yet this type of data and analysis is essential to ensure that public dollars are channeled toward investments that achieve Nova Scotia’s long-term climate and economic objectives and generate the highest possible societal return. Better historical data can also help inform current gaps and future investment needs.

5. A gradual shift from emissions-intensive goods toward services

Finally, the changing structure of Nova Scotia’s economy has helped facilitate the province’s drop in emissions. Figure 3 shows changes in GDP and employment in several key sectors in Nova Scotia from 2005 to 2018 and illustrates that most of the province’s growth in GDP and jobs was in the services sector, which is generally less emissions intensive. At the same time, the province’s goods-producing sectors have steadily contracted: between 2005 and 2018, GDP from the oil and gas sector fell by 87 per cent, coal mining by 84 per cent, and forestry and logging by 42 per cent.

Figure 3: Changes in GDP and Employment across Select Sectors in Nova Scotia (2005–2018)

Sources: Statistics Canada (2020b); Statistics Canada (2020g).

The figure also shows that some of the strongest growth in both jobs and GDP was in professional, scientific, and technical services, followed by the health care and social assistance sector. Jobs in the utility sector also saw significant growth over the period, which may be due in part to the increase in activity in energy efficiency programming. Based on GDP, services now represent 81 per cent of Nova Scotia’s entire economy, up from 74 per cent in 2005.

Most of these structural changes have come from shifts in global market dynamics (e.g., decreased demand for coal, or steel manufacturing moving to lower-cost countries) and were not the result of domestic policy choices. Nevertheless, the gradual shift to a service-based economy has undoubtedly played a key role in the decoupling of emissions from sources of growth in Nova Scotia’s economy.

CHALLENGES IN MAKING FUTURE PROGRESS

Next, we look at four challenges Nova Scotia faces as it approaches the next stage of clean growth. The province has set ambitious climate targets. Achieving them—while creating new employment opportunities, keeping energy affordable for households, and reducing air pollution—will take concerted effort.

1. Declining goods-production and high unemployment in small, rural communities

The same shift in market dynamics that helped reduce Nova Scotia’s emissions is creating big challenges for small and rural communities where industrial activities have historically provided a key source of income and jobs. As noted above, most goods-producing sectors have shrunk in Nova Scotia.

Competitiveness pressures have played a big role in the closure of several big facilities and projects in Nova Scotia, such as the Irving refinery in Dartmouth, the Sable Island offshore gas project, and pulp and paper mills in Liverpool and Pictou. In many cases—especially where a single facility provided the bulk of employment opportunities in a region—closures have resulted in high regional unemployment rates, declining tax bases, poverty, and health issues (Lionais et al., 2019).

These economic losses highlight the uneven—and often precarious—employment situation in small Nova Scotia communities with few major employers. Figure 4 shows Nova Scotia’s population centres with the highest unemployment rates from 2016, along with the average unemployment rates in Nova Scotia and Canada. Nearly half of all population centres with unemployment rates above the provincial average are in Cape Breton—a region that has struggled since the decline of its steel and coal industries in the mid 20th century (see Box 1). Many of these other communities have also faced a gradual decline in key industries, such as fishing, pulp and paper, and iron and steel, with few new sources of growth.

Figure 4: Unemployment Rate by Population Centre (2016)

Unemployment rates are particularly high in Indigenous communities. The Eskasoni First Nation in Cape Breton, the world’s largest Mi’kmaq community, had the highest unemployment rate in Nova Scotia in 2016, at 26 per cent. In the Atlantic Region as a whole, over 18 per cent of Indigenous peoples were unemployed in 2016, compared to 15 per cent nationally (ACOA, 2020).

Addressing this deep-seated problem with structural unemployment will not be easy. In many cases, dedicated retraining and education programs could help. However, retraining only helps if the jobs are there when training is complete. Determining where Nova Scotia has a competitive edge in a low-carbon economy is critical as its economy continues to transition.

Ensuring that existing sources of employment remain competitive is also important to future employment prospects. The paper mill in Port Hawkesbury, for example, located in southern Cape Breton, employs 300 workers—equivalent to about 20 per cent of the town’s labour force—and is the region’s largest source of private investment (King, 2019; Townfolio, 2020). The plant also consumes about 10 per cent of Nova Scotia’s total electricity use (Torrie, 2019). In 2019, the pulp mill signed a memorandum of understanding with the Canada Infrastructure Bank to develop a 112 MW wind farm to generate clean, renewable power (PPC, 2019). Ensuring that Nova Scotia’s remaining goods-producing industries are competitive in a low- carbon economy could be a key part of their future success.

BOX 1: Mobile workers in Cape Breton

Limited job prospects locally have pushed many Nova Scotians to find work in other provinces while still living on the east coast (known as “mobile work”). In particular, Western Canada’s oil and gas industry has helped absorb a substantial portion of Atlantic Canada’s weak labour market, especially for Cape Breton. In 2008, for example, over six percent of Cape Breton’s entire labour force worked in Alberta.

Although mobile work has become an important source of employment income for East Coast communities, it has proven highly unstable. When oil prices plunged from $US 80 per barrel in 2008 to $50 per barrel in 2009, the number of Cape Bretoners employed in Alberta fell by one quarter. The most recent drop in oil prices due to the COVID-19 pandemic will likely have a similar impact.

The longer-term prospects for Atlantic Canadians working in Western Canada’s oil and gas sector are even less certain as global markets shift away from carbon-intensive energy. Without a plan to transition its workforce, regions like Cape Breton could again be hit hard by changes in global demand.

Sources: Lionais et al. (2019); Campbell (2019).

2. Reducing economy-wide emissions and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050

Nova Scotia has set some of the most ambitious climate targets in the country. The recently proposed Sustainable Development Goals Act would commit the province to reducing emissions by 53 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030 and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.

Achieving these longer-term targets, however, requires a big lift. As of 2018, Nova Scotia reduced emissions by 26 per cent from 2005 levels, putting the province halfway to reaching its 2030 target. Its heavy reliance on coal-fired electricity made initial reductions relatively easy and cost-effective. Making additional gains will be harder.

The electricity sector, for example, is still the largest source of emissions. With less than three per cent of Canada’s population, emissions from Nova Scotia’s coal-fired units accounted for seven per cent of all GHG emissions from electricity generation in 2015 (ECCC, 2018a). Imports of clean electricity from the Muskrat Falls hydro dam in Newfoundland and Labrador will help Nova Scotia further reduce emissions from its electricity grid. But even if it imports the maximum amount of available energy from Muskrat Falls, more than half of Nova Scotia’s electricity could still come from fossil fuels (Torrie, 2019; NSURB, 2019). Based on an equivalency agreement with the Federal Government, coal and other fossil fuels are expected to play a central part of the Nova Scotia grid for the foreseeable future (EAC, 2020; ECCC. 2018).

Reducing emissions from the transportation sector has also proven difficult. Transport emissions fell between 2005 and 2014 but have risen since; sector emissions in 2018 were the same as they were in 2005. On a per capita basis, consumption of refined petroleum products in Nova Scotia was 12 per cent above the national average in 2018 and many areas still rely on heating oil. (CER, 2020). Nova Scotia implemented a cap-and-trade program for GHG emissions in 2018, but the policy is not expected to have a substantial impact on transportation emissions. The government estimates the program will decrease annual emissions by less than two per cent by 2022 (Government of Nova Scotia, 2019). Currently, EVs sales account for just 0.03 per cent of total annual vehicle sales in Nova Scotia, compared to 3.5 per cent of sales nationally (EAC, 2020); it also ranks poorly on EV charging infrastructure relative to other provinces (Efficiency Canada, 2019).

Nova Scotia also has room to improve when it comes to the total amount of GHGs associated with the goods and services consumed in the economy. Nova Scotia had the third-highest consumption emissions in Canada in 2011 (excluding the territories); only Alberta and Saskatchewan ranked higher (Dobson & Fellows, 2017). While consumption-based measures are typically not considered in how countries and provinces report their emissions internationally, they are important to achieving global low-carbon growth.

Nova Scotia will need to make significant progress in each of these areas if it is to meet its ambitious climate goals. In many cases, it will require pushing even harder on energy efficiency, decarbonizing the electricity grid, fostering clean technology and other sources of growth, and investing in more climate-related infrastructure. Reducing emissions from the transportation sector, for example, will require accelerating adoption rates of low-carbon technologies, such as electric and fuel cell vehicles. It will also likely require investments in “enabling” infrastructure—such as charging networks, cycling infrastructure, and public transit. And it will require investments in renewable power generation and efficiency improvements to ensure the province has sufficient clean energy to support the ongoing shift to greater electricity use. In each case, the province should consider how to best align these policies and technologies to achieve potentially transformative change (Haley, 2018).

Efforts are well underway to determine where and how Nova Scotia can achieve its climate goals while also addressing its other important economic and social objectives. The provincial government, for example, has planned consultations with citizens, rights-holders, and other stakeholders on its proposed Sustainable Development Goals Act (delayed due to the 2020 pandemic) and is developing its next climate change plan. The region is also working on the Clean Power Roadmap for Atlantic Canada, which aims to provide a vision for how the shift to cleaner power will fit within the broader energy needs of the region (CICS, 2019). Lastly, the province is awaiting a feasibility study on the potential of hydrogen production, storage, distribution, and use in the Maritimes, expected to be released in late 2020 (OERA, 2020).

3. Ensuring Nova Scotia households have affordable energy

As Nova Scotia looks to implement more ambitious policy to achieve its climate goals, energy affordability is a key consideration. Whether an energy policy reduces the cost of efficient retrofits or raises the price of gasoline to encourage the use of cleaner alternatives, the transition to a low-carbon economy has implications for households and affordability. And while climate policy cannot singlehandedly resolve complex and deep-rooted socioeconomic disparities, policies can and should be designed to keep energy affordable—especially for financially vulnerable households.

Energy affordability is an ongoing challenge in Nova Scotia. Nova Scotia has some of the highest electricity rates in the country, and a large number of households still burn furnace oil or wood to heat their homes, which can be costly and inefficient options (Hydro Quebec, 2019; CER, 2018). At the same time, natural gas prices in the province are expected to climb even higher with the closure of its offshore gas production (Casey, 2019). And while Nova Scotia has made good progress on making energy more affordable for the most financially vulnerable (discussed above), the bulk of Nova Scotians spend more of their household budget on energy than households in other provinces.

Figure 5 shows the average share of household energy expenditures in Nova Scotia and Canada for 2017. Households are broken out into five groups based on their income—called quintiles—ranging from the lowest-income households to the highest. Energy expenditures include home heating and power, along with transportation expenditures (i.e., gasoline, public transit, taxis).

Overall, Nova Scotians spend a larger share of their household income on energy compared to households in the rest of Canada. For example, lower- to middle-class households (i.e., those in the second and third quintiles) spend 60 per cent more of their household budget on energy compared to the average Canadian. These two income brackets include households that, in many cases, have bigger houses than the lowest-earning segment and are more likely to own and drive private vehicles.

Household energy expenditures in Nova Scotia have, however, decreased over time across all income segments. In 2010, for example, households in the second income quintile spent 19 per cent of their total expenditures on energy. By 2018, these same households spent (on average) 13 per cent of their total expenditures on energy. This downward trend also happened during a period where electricity prices and gasoline prices increased, suggesting that improvements in energy efficiency played a key role in reducing average energy expenditures (NRCan, 2020).³

Still, scaling up energy efficiency programs for households could help make energy more affordable for those paying a disproportionately high share of their income on energy. Expanding the existing energy efficiency program for Mi’kmaq communities, for example, could help build capacity and allow communities to lead energy efficiency projects themselves.

4. Improving air quality in rural Nova Scotia

Clean air is central to the health and well-being of Nova Scotians. And while Nova Scotians generally enjoy clean air relative to other parts of the world, there are still strong links between sources of GHG emissions, air pollution, and risks to Nova Scotians’ health. As a result, Nova Scotia has significant opportunities to improve the health of residents as it accelerates action to reduce GHG emissions.

Although Nova Scotia only has a handful of monitoring stations, data from 2017-18 suggest that several rural areas experienced relatively high levels of ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter—central ingredients in smog. Figure 6 below shows annual average levels of ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter for several Nova Scotia municipalities where data is available, along with Toronto and Vancouver for comparison. The figures also include the Canadian Air Quality Standards for reference, which are jointly set by federal and provincial governments.

Figure 6: Annual Average Ground-level Ozone (top) and Fine Particulate Matter Emissions (bottom) (2017-18)

Overall, six municipalities in Nova Scotia had ground-level ozone levels that were higher than Halifax and Vancouver. Perhaps surprisingly, ozone levels in these mostly small and rural municipalities approached levels found in Toronto. Levels of fine particulate matter tell a similar story, where levels were similar to or exceeded those in Halifax (with the exception of Aylesford).

These high levels of O3 and particulate matter pose serious health risks to Nova Scotians. Health Canada, for example, estimates that roughly 260 Nova Scotians die prematurely from air pollution each year.⁴ When controlling for population, Nova Scotia has the seventh highest risk exposure of premature mortalities when compared to all 13 provinces and territories. Efforts to reduce GHG emissions in the province would have clear health benefits.

Sulphur dioxide emissions in Nova Scotia—although well below national emissions standards—also have health implications for rural communities, with possible connections to the province’s remaining stock of coal-fired electricity facilities. Sulphur dioxide levels in Port Hawksbury, Pictou, and Sydney, for example, are two to three times higher than in Halifax. Each of these three communities have coal- fired electricity generating stations in or near their communities. And while existing regulatory measures to reduce coal-fired generation in Nova Scotia will help prevent 89 premature deaths, 8,000 asthma episodes, and 58,000 days of breathing difficulty (Gunn, 2019), its remaining coal-fired power plants still pose health risks.

Improving air quality in Nova Scotian communities, however, is not entirely within the government’s control. A portion of Nova Scotia’s poor air quality comes from the eastern U.S., where coal-fired electricity is also common. The small Nova Scotia towns of Kejimkujik and Aylesford, for example, are both rural and do not have any major source of industrial emissions nearby. In these cases, efforts to shift to cleaner electricity in the Eastern U.S. could go a long way toward making Nova Scotia’s air healthier.

CONCLUSIONS & LESSONS LEARNED

This case study provides a window into Nova Scotia’s journey toward low-carbon growth, looking at both its successes and areas for future improvement. Its provincial context is unique, but many lessons are applicable to other provinces and territories that are seeking their own pathways to cleaner growth:

Nova Scotia demonstrates that it is possible to maintain economic growth while reducing GHG emissions. The province also managed to keep job growth consistent with population growth and increase wages and salaries faster than in most other provinces.
A big reason for the province’s success was reducing GHG emissions from its emissions-intensive electricity sector. Other provinces with emissions- intensive electricity grids could achieve similar gains.
Nova Scotia is the first province with an independent and well-funded energy efficiency utility, helping reduce emissions while generating cost savings. Energy efficiency improvements have helped keep energy affordable for low-income households, reduced peak demand and the need for new capital spending, and have created a burgeoning industry with well-paying jobs.
Nova Scotia’s mature ecosystem of research and development has been instrumental in building a successful clean technology sector. Key factors include strong public investment in R&D, a dense network of universities, and policies that leverage these resources.
Investing in low-carbon electricity and renewable power generation is a critical first step toward the broader switch to clean electricity throughout the economy. All climate-related investments, however, should be accompanied by a full assessment of their economic and environmental value to help prioritize projects with the highest financial and societal return.

While Nova Scotia has been successful in accelerating low-carbon growth, this case studied highlighted several challenges the provincial government will need to confront in the coming years if is to achieve its ambitious and laudable climate commitments. Here too, insights from Nova Scotia’s experience are relevant to other jurisdictions, especially as more governments, businesses, and communities commit to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.

Shifts in global markets have left many small and rural areas in the province with high unemployment rates, particularly in Indigenous communities. Retraining parts of the labour force while developing new market opportunities will be essential to achieving inclusive and lasting growth in the future.
Additional GHG reductions—and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050—will be a difficult task. Like many other provinces, Nova Scotia is struggling to reduce transportation emissions. Electrification provides a key opportunity to help decarbonize this sector, along with buildings and industrial sectors, though it will likely require an expansion in low-carbon electricity production.
Although Nova Scotia has done well with keeping energy affordable for those with the lowest incomes, most Nova Scotians spend substantially more on energy than in other provinces. Keeping energy affordable is likely to be a key consideration as governments continue to support and build cleaner energy systems.Many small and rural communities—both in Nova Scotia and in the rest of Canada—grapple with levels of air pollution that sometimes exceed urban areas. Reducing GHG emissions can significantly improve local air quality and generate big health benefits.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This case study was prepared by Jonathan Arnold of the Canadian Climate Institute, with staff contributions from Rachel Samson and Weseem Ahmed.

REFERENCES

ACOA (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency). 2020. “The Labour Market in Atlantic Canada.” Government of Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/atlantic-canada-opportunities/services/ researchstudies10.html

Campbell, Mary. 2019. “When the Emergency is Chronic.” Cape Breton Spectator. 6 March. https:// capebretonspectator.com/2019/03/06/when-the-emergency-is-chronic/

Casey, Q. (2019). “The highest gas bills in Canada about to get higher as East Coast production dries up.” Financial Post. 1 March. https://financialpost.com/commodities/energy/the-highest-gas-bills-in-canada- about-to-get-higher-as-east-coast-production-dries-up

CER (Canada Energy Regulator). 2017. “Canada’s Renewable Power Landscape 2017 – Energy Market Analysis.” Government of Canada. https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/nrg/sttstc/lctrct/rprt/2017cndrnwblpwr/prvnc/ ns-eng.html?=undefined&wbdisable=true

CER (Canada Energy Regulator). 2018. “Market Snapshot: What is in your residential natural gas bill?” Government of Canada. https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/nrg/ntgrtd/mrkt/snpsht/2018/07-04rsdntlntrlgsbll- eng.html

CER (Canada Energy Regulator). 2019. “Market Snapshot: Growing heat pump adoption – how does the technology work?” Government of Canada. https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/nrg/ntgrtd/mrkt/snpsht/2019/04- 03grwnghtpmpdptn-eng.html

CER (Canada Energy Regulator). 2020. “Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Nova Scotia.” Government of Canada. https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/nrg/ntgrtd/mrkt/nrgsstmprfls/ns-eng.html

CICS (Canadian Intergovernmental Conference Secretariat). 2019. “Atlantic Growth Strategy Maps Atlantic Canada’s Clean Energy Future.” Atlantic Growth Strategy Leadership Committee. https://scics.ca/en/ product-produit/news-release-atlantic-growth-strategy-maps-atlantic-canadas-clean-energy-future/

Cleantech Group. 2020. “Cleantech Group Names 2020 Global Cleantech 100 – Top Private Companies in Clean Technology.” https://www.cleantech.com/release/top-private-companies-in-clean-technology- named/

Conference Board of Canada. 2020. “How Canada Performs: Public R&D.” https://www. conferenceboard.ca/(X(1)S(31sazs5b1e1gv0mxqqrwquqs))/hcp/provincial/innovation/perd. aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

Dobson, Sarah, and Kent Fellows. 2017. Embodied Emissions in Inputs and Outputs: A Value-Added Approach to National Emissions Accounting. Canadian Public Policy 43(2): 1-25.

EAC (Ecology Action Centre). 2020. Electric vehicle adoption in Nova Scotia: 2020-2030. Prepared by Dunsky Energy Consulting.

ECCC (Environment and Climate Change Canada). 2018a. “Regulations Amending the Reduction of Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal-fired Generation of Electricity Regulations.” Canada Gazette, Part 1 (152). http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2018/2018-02-17/html/reg3-eng.html

ECCC (Environment and Climate Change Canada). 2018b. “National air pollution surveillance program.” Government of Canada. Retrieved from http://data.ec.gc.ca/data/air/monitor/national-air-pollution- surveillance-naps-program/Data-Donnees/?lang=en

ECCC (Environment and Climate Change Canada). 2020. Canada’s Official Greenhouse Gas Inventory. Government of Canada. http://data.ec.gc.ca/data/substances/monitor/canada-s-official-greenhouse-gas- inventory/

Efficiency Canada. 2019. Canadian Provincial Energy Efficiency Scorecard. https://www.scorecard. efficiencycanada.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Scorecard.pdf

Efficiency One. 2018. “Annual Report: All the Good Things.” https://s3-ca-central-1.amazonaws.com/ ens-efficiency-ns-prod-offload-647701102377-ca-central-1/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/07011835/ENS_ AnnualReport_2018.pdf

Efficiency One. 2020. “Homes in Mi’kmaw communities across Nova Scotia to benefit from energy- efficient upgrades.” News & Events. https://www.efficiencyone.ca/news/

Government of Nova Scotia. 2012. “LED Street Lighting”. https://energy.novascotia.ca/energy-efficiency/ efficiency-and-conservation/buildings-and-appliances/led-street-lighting

Government of Nova Scotia. 2019. Nova Scotia’s Cap and Trade Program: Regulatory Framework. Nova Scotia Environment. https://climatechange.novascotia.ca/sites/default/files/Nova-Scotia-Cap-and-Trade- Regulatory-Framework.pdf

Government of Nova Scotia. 2020. “Developmental Tidal Feed-in Tariff Program.” https://energy. novascotia.ca/renewables/programs-and-projects/tidal-fit

Gunn, Andrea. 2019. “Coal fires most of Nova Scotia’s energy; will we still be burning it in 20 years?” Chronicle Herald. 30 April 2019. https://www.thechronicleherald.ca/news/local/coal-fires-most-of-nova- scotias-energy-will-we-still-be-burning-it-in-20-years-307232/

Haley, Brendan. 2018. Integrating structural tensions into technological innovation systems analysis: Application to the case of transmission interconnections and renewable electricity in Nova Scotia, Canada. Research Policy 47: 1147–1160.

Halifax Regional Council. 2020. Strategic transit projects. https://www.halifax.ca/sites/default/files/ documents/city-hall/regional-council/200526rc917pres.pdf

Jarratt, Emma. 2020. “The Jeff Dahn effect: superstar alumni and a growing regional battery cluster.” Electric Autonomy Canada. 21 August 2020. https://electricautonomy.ca/2020/08/21/the-jeff-dahn-effect/

King, Nancy. 2019. “No production time lost at Port Hawkesbury Paper despite fire.” Cape Breton Post. https://www.capebretonpost.com/business/local-business/no-production-time-lost-at-port-hawkesbury- paper-despite-fire-331329/

Lau, R. (2020). Smart meters coming to Nova Scotia Power customers. Global News. 12 June 2020. https:// globalnews.ca/news/4268675/nova-scotia-power-smart-meters/

Lionais, Doug, Christina Murray, and Chloe Donatelli. 2020. “Dependence on Interprovincial Migrant Labour in Atlantic Canada Communities: The Role of the Alberta Economy.” Societies 10 (11).

OERA (Offshore Energy Research Association). 2020. “Feasibility Study to Evaluate Hydrogen Production, Storage, Distribution and Use in The Maritimes.” https://oera.ca/news/news-release-feasibility-study- evaluate-hydrogen-production-storage-distribution-and-use

Municipality of Digby. 2020. “LED Street Lights.” https://www.digbydistrict.ca/led-street-lights.html Nova Scotia PACE. 2020. “PACE Programs.” https://novascotiapace.ca/pace-programs/

NRCan (Natural Resources Canada). 2020. “Weekly Average Retail Prices for Furnace Oil in 2017.” http:// www2.nrcan.gc.ca/eneene/sources/pripri/prices_bycity_e.cf m?

NRCan (Natural Resources Canada). 2020. “Weekly Average Retail Prices for Furnace Oil in 2017.” https:// www.nrcan.gc.ca/our-natural-resources/domestic-international-markets/transportation-fuel-prices/ furnace-oil-prices/4799

NSP (Nova Scotia Power). 2020a. “Nova Scotia Reaches 30% Renewable Energy Milestone. https://www. nspower.ca/about-us/press-releases/details/2019/06/10/nova-scotia-power-reaches-30-renewable-energy- milestone”

NSP (Nova Scotia Power). 2020b. “Smart Grid Nova Scotia.” https://www.nspower.ca/community/ innovation/smart-grid-nova-scotia

NSURB (Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board). 2019. Ten Year System Outlook. https://irp.nspower.ca/files/ key-documents/background-materials/20190702-2019-10-Year-System-Outlook.pdf

PPC (Pulp & Paper Canada). 2019. “Port Hawkesbury Paper signs MOU to develop wind farm plan for green energy.” https://www.pulpandpapercanada.com/port-hawkesbury-paper-signs-mou-to-develop- wind-farm-plan-for-green-energy/

Quebec Hydro. 2019. Comparison of Electricity Prices in Major North American Cities. https://www. hydroquebec.com/data/documents-donnees/pdf/comparison-electricity-prices.pdf

Statistics Canada. 2016. “Data Tables: 2016 Census.” Government of Canada. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/

Statistics Canada. 2019. “Gross Domestic Product, Expenditure-based, Provincial and Territorial, Annual.” Government of Canada. https://www150.Statistics Canada.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3610022201

Statistics Canada. 2020a. “Table 14-10-0090-01: Labour force characteristics by province, territory and economic region, annual.” Government of Canada. https://doi.org/10.25318/1410009001-eng

Statistics Canada. 2020b. Table: 14-10-0023-01: Labour force characteristics by industry. https://www150. statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1410002301.

Statistics Canada. 2020c. Table: 11-10-0239-01: Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas.

Statistics Canada. 2020d. “Table 36-10-0630-01: Environmental and Clean Technology Products Economic Account, gross domestic product.” Government of Canada. https://doi.org/10.25318/3610063001-eng

Statistics Canada. 2020e. “Environmental and Clean Technology Products Economic Account, 2018.” Government of Canada. https://www150.Statistics Canada.gc.ca/n1/daily-quotidien/200313/dq200313b- eng.htm

Statistics Canada. 2020f. “Table 36-10-0608-01: Infrastructure Economic Accounts, investment and net stock by asset, industry, and asset function.” Government of Canada. https://www150.Statistics Canada. gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/cv.action?pid=3610060801#timef rame

Statistics Canada. 2020g. “Table 36-10-0402-01: Gross domestic product (GDP) at basic prices, by industry, provinces and territories.” Government of Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/ tv.action?pid=3610040201

Statistics Canada. 2020h. “Household spending by household income quintile, Canada, regions and provinces.” Government of Canada. Retrieved from https://www150.Statistics Canada.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/ tv.action?pid=1110022301

Torrie, Ralph. 2019. Accelerating the Coal Phase Out: Nova Scotia and the Climate Emergency. Prepared by Torrie Smith Associates for the Ecology Action Centre. https://ecologyaction.ca/sites/default/files/ images-documents/EAC%20Coal%20Phaseout%20Report%20-%20April%202020.pdf

Townfolio. 2020. “Port Hawkesbury: Labour Force.” https://townfolio.co/ns/port-hawkesbury/labour-force

Verschuren Centre. 2020. “Solutions and opportunities to grow a sustainable economy.” http://www. verschurencentre.ca/

Climate Legislation in British Columbia

SUMMARY

In 2018, the Government of British Columbia (B.C.) introduced the Climate Change Accountability Act. The Climate Change Accountability Act amended and renamed the Greenhouse Gas Reductions Targets Act from 2007 and introduced a number of legislated updates, including setting 2030 and 2040 emissions reduction targets en route to the previously set 2050 target, providing a framework to develop reports on climate change risks and progress, and enabling the minister to set sectoral Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets.

In 2019, the Government of B.C. passed Bill 38, amending the Climate Change Accountability Act of 2018. The 2019 legislative amendments introduced a broader climate accountability framework that mandates the setting of sectoral and interim emissions reduction targets (though does not set them out in the legislation), implements more detailed and regular reporting requirements for government, and establishes an independent expert advisory body to provide advice. It also grants the Lieutenant Governor in Council the authority to enact regulations prescribing requirements and targets for public sector buildings, vehicle fleets, and the fuels they employ. This case study explores the core features of B.C.’s amended Climate Change Accountability Act 2019 (the Act).

FEATURES OF B.C.’S LEGISLATION

1. Legislating climate accountability processes

The 2019 amendments to the Act established a climate accountability framework for B.C., including a number of key features. In particular, the amended Act mandates that the Government of B.C.:

Set an interim target for GHG emissions reductions on the path to the existing legislated 2030 target;
Establish emissions reductions targets for individual sectors;
Adhere to new, more frequent, and more detailed reporting requirements across both climate mitigation and adaptation goals and policies; and
Establish an independent advisory committee.

2. Clearly defining roles and responsibilities

B.C. Government Duties

Under B.C.’s Act, the responsible minister has a statutory duty to establish emissions targets, to appoint an advisory committee, to report on progress towards targets and the actions taken to achieve them, and to report on actions to manage climate change risks.

The legislative amendments also introduce new requirements for the provincial government and other public sector organizations to report on actions taken towards minimizing their organizational GHG emissions (see Section 5 for more details).

Advisory Committee

The amended legislation establishes an independent advisory body to provide advice on an annual basis to the minister on climate change issues. In particular, the advisory committee must provide advice on:

Plans and actions to meet long-term emissions reduction targets;
Plans and actions to mitigate and manage climate change risks;
Opportunities for sustainable economic development and job creation in the transition to a low-carbon economy; and
The effects on individuals and businesses that result from actions to address climate change.

The new independent advisory body, named the Climate Solutions Council, will carry on the advisory role of the Climate Solutions and Clean Growth Advisory Council, whose mandate wrapped up in 2019 (Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, 2020).

The independent advisory body will be comprised of up to 20 members, at least half of which must be women. The advisory body must also include at least one representative from each of the following groups: local governments, Indigenous peoples, environmental organizations, academia, unions, residents of rural and remote communities, and the business community.

Members of the advisory committee were announced in February 2020. The legislation requires that the minister publish the names of the advisory members. It also limits their terms of appointment to six years. Notably, the legislation does not establish any statutory oversight duties for the advisory committee. However, the Minister’s annual report must include the advice received from the advisory committee.

3. Establishing interim emissions reduction milestones

The Greenhouse Gas Reductions Target Act, passed in 2007, established provincial GHG emissions reduction targets for 2020 (33 per cent reductions below 2007 levels) and 2050 (80 per cent reductions below 2007 levels). The 2018 Climate Change Accountability Act introduced additional targets for 2030 (40 per cent reductions below 2007 levels) and 2040 (60 per cent reductions below 2007 levels) and repealed the province’s previously set 2020 target, which the province was projected to miss.

The 2019 legislative amendments introduced a requirement for government to establish an additional interim target for a year prior to 2030. The government must establish the interim emission target no later than December 31, 2020. The minister retains already established powers to set additional emissions reductions targets for other years or periods.

The legislative amendments also mandate the minister to establish emission reduction targets for individual sectors no later than March 31, 2021. The minister must review the targets before the end of 2025 and at least once every five years following the initial review. The minister may establish other GHG emissions reduction targets for additional individual sectors at any time. Notably, the legislation does not name specific sectors or how those sectors will be defined or broken down. The sectoral targets will be established following engagement with stakeholders, Indigenous peoples and communities throughout the province.

4. Producing action plans to meet milestones

Each year, the government is required to table a report that outlines the actions taken and proposed to reduce GHG emissions and manage climate risks, including details on past and planned expenditures, as well as how these actions are expected to achieve the objectives and emissions reduction targets set out in legislation. It must also outline the government’s plans for continued progress towards achieving its emissions reduction targets and for managing climate change risks. The
report must outline the advice received by the minister from the expert advisory committee. Every five years, starting in 2020, the annual report must also include a determination of climate change risks.

5. Monitoring and reporting

The legislative amendments introduced a number of new reporting requirements for the government. In addition to the mandatory reporting on past and proposed action plans (detailed above), the government’s annual report must also include a number of additional elements, including:

A determination of provincial GHG emissions in the most recent calendar year for which measurements are available;
Estimates of provincial GHG emissions in the current calendar year in which the report was prepared;
Estimates of provincial GHG emissions for the subsequent two years; and
An estimate of provincial emissions for the year between the latest provincial inventory report and the year in which the government’s report is prepared.

This improves upon B.C.’s existing public reporting on GHG emissions using the provincial inventory report, for which there is currently a two-year delay. While the reporting will still rely on the provincial inventory report, the government will use other tools to estimate provincial emissions for interim years.

The annual report must be tabled in B.C.’s Legislative Assembly during the calendar year in which it was prepared. If the report is finalized after the Legislative Assembly has risen, it must be tabled in the first sitting upon its return in the following year.

The legislative amendments also introduce new climate accountability reporting requirements for the provincial government and other public sector organizations. Every year, the minister must prepare, and make publicly available, a climate change accountability report, which must include (among other elements) an estimate of GHG emissions from the provincial government that year, the actions taken in that year by the provincial government to minimize the public sector’s GHG emissions, the provincial government’s plans to continue to reduce those emissions, as well as the actions taken by the provincial government to achieve any prescribed targets related to public sector buildings, motor vehicles, and the fuels they use.

Each public sector organization other than the provincial government (e.g. crown corporations, health authorities, advisory boards, tribunals, and school districts) is required to release an annual report following the same reporting requirements, except for the requirement to achieve any targets related to public sector buildings, vehicle fleet, and fuels, which applies only to the provincial government.

6. Beyond emissions reductions

The legislative amendments go beyond a singular focus on emissions reductions to integrate climate change risk and adaptation, as well as broader social and economic impacts of climate policy. With respect to adaptation, the legislation dictates that every year the minister’s report must outline information about climate change risks and the government’s actions to manage them—both those taken to date and planned. Every five years, the report must also include a detailed provincial climate change risk assessment. The new legislative amendments also require that public sector organizations manage the risks to their organization that could result from climate change as well as take steps to minimize their environmental impacts.

In addition to a focus on adaptation, the legislation also integrates broader social and economic considerations. In particular, the advisory committee is required to provide advice to the minister on opportunities for sustainable economic development and job creation in the transition to a low- carbon economy as well as with respect to the impacts of climate policy on individuals and businesses.

LESSONS FOR CANADA

Sectoral targets can help guide policy development, but may present challenges B.C.’s legislative amendments commit to setting sectoral targets by 2021, to be reviewed every five years. Sector-level targets provide more detail on how and where emissions reductions could occur. However, setting targets at the sector-level may also present challenges. First, defining discrete sectors can be challenging, as can divvying up emissions reduction targets between them. Exactly how B.C. will allocate and break out its sector targets remains to be seen, though the government has committed to allocating them based on consultation with communities, people, and industry (Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. 2019). In addition, sectors themselves are not accountable entities so challenges may arise when it comes to enforcement and accountability. However, in B.C.’s case, the sector targets are primarily intended to provide more detailed sector goal posts to enhance provincial planning and tracking, as well as broader provincial accountability, rather than increase sector-level enforcement. Lastly, imposing fixed targets on sectors has the potential to limit flexibility and create rigidities that force reductions in parts in the economy despite more cost-effective reductions being available elsewhere, potentially resulting in inefficiencies. B.C.’s review of sector targets every five years helps to mitigate these risks by creating frequent opportunities for course correction if more optimal reduction pathways become available.

Regular and detailed reporting supports transparency and accountability

The 2019 amendments to the Climate Change Accountability Act introduced more regular and detailed reporting requirements for the provincial government. As discussed above, the annual reports must outline the steps the government is taking to reduce emissions and manage climate risks, as well as the latest emissions data trends and projections. This annual reporting is an improvement from B.C.’s existing public reporting on GHG emissions. Transparent, regular, and publicly available data is essential for informing governments, stakeholders, and individuals on progress towards climate change goals. It is key to enabling early course- correction if the government is not on track. And it allows B.C. residents to better hold their government to account if the government is not meeting its climate change commitments.

Lack of independent oversight limits accountability

While the Act’s establishment of an independent committee to advise government on climate change issues is key to enhancing the credibility of its climate accountability framework, the legislation does not mandate the advisory committee (or any other independent body) to monitor government progress towards targets. The absence of independent oversight represents a weakness of B.C.’s legislation. Independent oversight is essential to ensuring that assessments of government progress are perceived to be evidence- based and non-partisan. This, in turn, helps support credibility and transparency, as well as widespread buy-in.

Broadening the scope beyond a singular focus on emissions reductions

B.C.’s legislative amendments go beyond a singular focus on reducing emissions to also recognize the importance of managing climate change risks and supporting broader clean growth objectives. As described above, the Act emphasizes the importance of managing climate change risks throughout, including in the advice provided by the advisory committee, in the minister’s annual report, and through the climate change risk assessment to be conducted every five years. However, while reporting on actions taken and planned to manage climate change risks is critical, the Act lacks any formal requirements for those risks to actually be reduced (as it does for GHG emissions).

In addition to the Act’s inclusion of managing climate change risks, it also integrates a focus on clean growth. In particular, the Act requires that the advisory committee advise the government on opportunities for sustainable economic development and job creation while B.C. transitions to a low-carbon economy, as well as consider the effects on individuals and businesses that result from actions to address climate change. While this is a notable inclusion, the legislation does not explicitly require that the government’s plans include specific measures to support workers, communities, and industries impacted by the transition towards a low-carbon economy.

Absence of a mechanism to review long-term targets limits credibility and transparency

While the Climate Change Accountability Act introduced 2030 and 2040 targets, it did not revise the 2050 target, originally set through the 2007 Greenhouse Gas Reductions Targets Act. Some critics have called for a revision of the 2050 target to a net zero one, in order to align with climate science and guidance from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Ecojustice, 2019; Georgia Strait Alliance, 2019). Although the Act requires a review of the sectoral targets at least every five years, it does not include any sort of mechanism to review its long-term or interim emissions reductions targets. Several jurisdictions that have implemented climate accountability legislation—including New Zealand and the United Kingdom—have legislated clear and codified rules governing how targets are set and the circumstances in which they can be revised. This approach supports transparency and credibility, while also allowing for flexibility in the face of changing conditions – such as developments in climate science or international commitments. Without clear guidelines for target revision, B.C.’s legislation risks either maintaining targets that do not keep pace with climate science or changing the targets in a way that does not appear transparent or credible.

REFERENCES

Climate Change Accountability Act, 2019.
http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/07042_01

Ecojustice. 2019. “New climate accountability bill triggers much-needed reboot of B.C. climate laws.” 31 October 2019.
https://www.ecojustice.ca/pressrelease/new-climate-accountability-bill-triggers-much- needed-reboot-of-b-c-climate-laws/

Gage, Andrew. “Looking for accountability in BC’s Climate Change Accountability Act.” West Coast Environmental Law. 14 May 2018. https://www.wcel.org/blog/looking-accountability- in-bcs-climate- change-accountability-act

Georgia Strait Alliance. 2019. “B.C. strengthens Climate Accountability Act.” 30 October 2019.
https://georgiastrait.org/press/b-c-strengthens-climate-accountability-act/

Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Act, 2007.
http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/consol22/consol22/00_07042_01

Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Amendment Act, 2018.
https://www.leg.bc.ca/parliamentary-business/legislation-debates-proceedings/41st- parliament/3rd- session/bills/first-reading/gov34-1

Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. 2020. Clean BC Building a cleaner, stronger BC: 2019 Climate Change Accountability Report. Government of British Columbia.
https://www2. gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/climate-change/action/progress-to- targets/2019-climatechange- accountability-report-web.pdf

Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. 2019. “News Release: Climate action gets new teeth with accountability act.” Government of British Columbia. 30 October 2019.
https://news.gov.bc.ca/ releases/2019ENV0110-002082

Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. 2020. “Renewed team with help B.C. build on first year of climate action.” Government of British Columbia. 10 February 2020.
https://archive.news.gov. bc.ca/releases/news_releases_2017-2021/2020ENV0003- 000250.pdf

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This case study was prepared by Anna Kanduth of the Canadian Climate Institute, with contributions from Jason Dion.

Manitoba’s Climate and Green Plan Implementation Act 2018

SUMMARY

In 2018, Manitoba became the first province in Canada to implement climate accountability legislation. Manitoba’s approach and experience offers valuable lessons for Canadian governments contemplating interim emissions reduction milestones and broader climate accountability legislation. Unlike other jurisdictions that have implemented climate accountability legislation, including the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and British Columbia, Manitoba’s legislation does not include long-term emissions reductions targets or a clearly-defined emissions reduction pathway. This case study reviews the defining features of Manitoba’s legislation.

FEATURES OF MANITOBA’S LEGISLATION

1. Legislating climate accountability processes

The Climate and Green Plan Implementation Act, 2018 (the Act) introduced a Carbon Savings Account (CSA), which sets cumulative emissions reduction goals for five-year periods and is supported by accountability features and process, including an independent expert advisory body, compulsory government action plans, and regular monitoring and reporting.

2. Clearly defining roles and responsibilities

Manitoba government duties

The Minister of Conservation and Climate (formerly named the Minister of Sustainable Development) is the minister responsible for administering the Act. Under the Act, the Minister’s duties include establishing governance structures, maintaining the CSA, developing plans to reduce emissions, and regularly reporting on progress. The legislation also commits to creating a Low Carbon Government Office, which is responsible for developing and implementing policies and initiatives to reduce emissions and promote sustainable government operations.

Expert Advisory Council

The Act also established an Expert Advisory Council (EAC), an independent group of experts with a mandate to provide advice and recommendations to the Minister on the Climate and Green Plan, including the CSA. Members of the EAC are appointed by the Minister.

The EAC’s roles include providing advice on what policies should be included in the Climate and Green Plan, reviewing progress on the implementation of the plan, and providing recommendations for setting emissions reduction goals. In providing advice and recommendations, the EAC must take into consideration a number of parameters laid out in the legislation, including economic, industrial, and demographic projections; the implementation of GHG reduction measures; and the availability and use of new and emerging technologies. Notably, the EAC has no statutory powers.

3. Establishing interim emissions reduction milestones

Manitoba’s CSA establishes five-year cumulative emissions reduction goals for the province, set one CSA period at a time. Each five-year CSA is measured against the year before the CSA period commences, known as the dynamic year baseline (Expert Advisory Council, 2019). The Government must establish the emissions reduction goal for each CSA period before its start date and they must take into account the advice and recommendations of the EAC when doing so. In developing its recommendation on the emissions-reductions goal, the EAC relies on original modelling of emissions- reduction scenarios and measures, sector analysis, stakeholder input, and emissions trends and forecasts (Expert Advisory Council, 2019).

The Minister set the CSA for the first five-year period (2018-2022) at 1 Mt of cumulative emissions reductions, in line with the recommendation provided by the EAC (Government of Manitoba, 2019). In March 2020, the Government of Manitoba introduced plans to legislate a flat $25/tonne carbon levy effective July 1, 2020, which the Government estimates will double cumulative emissions reductions for the first CSA period to 2 Mt (Government of Manitoba, 2020).

The Manitoba model is somewhat flexible in terms of meeting its CSA. At the end of a CSA period, any shortfalls must be added to the subsequent budget, as part of the debit feature of the CSA. There is no limit to what can be carried forward. However, each CSA will increase over the previous period (Government of Manitoba, 2017).

4. Producing action plans to meet milestones

The Minister of Conservation and Climate is responsible for developing the Climate and Green Plan, which outlines a comprehensive set of policies and programs to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Legislation dictates that, when developing and implementing the plan, the Minister must take into account the advice of the EAC.

5. Monitoring and reporting

Each year, the government is required under the Act to table in the Legislative Assembly an annual report on emissions reductions, policies implemented, and progress against the carbon savings account. The annual report must also outline the emissions from all government departments and agencies for that year.

At the end of each five-year CSA period, the government must prepare a final report on emissions during the period, including an assessment on whether the goal was achieved. The EAC supports these efforts by establishing the methodology and benchmarks to measure CSA progress (Expert Advisory Council, 2019).

6. Beyond emissions reductions

The Climate and Green Plan Implementation Act goes beyond a narrow focus on emissions reductions to also include broader economic and environmental objectives. In particular, the Climate and Green Plan must include a comprehensive set of programs, policies and measures that:

reduce GHG emissions and address the effects of climate change;
promote sustainable development;
improve the management and protection of the Manitoba’s water resources; and
preserve and protect the province’s natural habitat and diversity.

LESSONS FOR CANADA

Cumulative emissions reductions budgets offer benefits over single-year targets

The CSA sets a five-year cumulative emissions reductions budget, as opposed to setting a target for the end-year of the account period. Cumulative emissions budgets limit the total emissions over a given period, while emissions reduction targets do not (since any number of pathways could be followed to reach a single-year target).

The cumulative approach recognizes that what ultimately matters for reducing the impacts on climate change are the total emissions released into the atmosphere, not just the level of emissions in any given year. The federal government can learn from Manitoba’s approach when determining whether its five-year milestones represent targets or emissions budgets.

Lack of a long-term target diminishes accountability, predictability, and certainty

Manitoba’s Climate and Green Plan Implementation Act does not enshrine a long- term emissions reduction target into law, nor does the province have a publicly stated long-term goal. Making a long-term target legally binding through legislation increases government’s accountability to act on climate change and provides increased certainty and predictability around the future emission reduction path for businesses, investors, consumers, and policy makers at all levels of government. Without this long-term target, there is also less information to guide the setting of interim milestones.

Setting budgets one-at-a-time reduces accountability, predictability, and certainty

While Manitoba’s approach of setting one budget at a time provides flexibility to policy makers to respond to changing conditions, it lacks the certainty of a long-term path that a more deterministic pathway provides, such as one where a minimum of three budgets are in place at any given time. In addition, having only one budget in place opens the door to discretionary changes to the budget, including for political reasons. Although the government’s commitment to increase emissions reductions over each CSA period implies a certain level of sustained ambition, a more deterministic pathway would enable greater accountability, predictability, and certainty.

A big step forward

Manitoba’s Climate and Green Plan Implementation Act is a significant step forward for climate policy in Canada. The legislation of an accountability framework— complete with formalized governance processes, cumulative emissions reduction targets, and expert advice—is something that could benefit governments across Canada as they seek to reduce emissions and tackle climate change.

REFERENCES

Expert Advisory Council. 2019. Report of the Expert Advisory Council to the Minister of Sustainable Development – A Carbon Savings Account for Manitoba.
https://manitoba.ca/asset_library/en/eac/eac_carbon_savings_report2019.pdf

Government of Manitoba. 2017. A Made-in-Manitoba Climate and Green Plan: Hearing from Manitobans.
https://www.gov.mb.ca/asset_library/en/climatechange/climategreenplandiscussionpaper.pdf

Government of Manitoba. 2020. A Made-in-Manitoba Green Levy: Moving Manitoba Forward with the Climate and Green Plan.
https://news.gov.mb.ca/asset_library/en/newslinks/2020/03/BG-Carbon_ Pricing-PR.pdf

Government of Manitoba. 2019. Manitoba’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Goal for 2018 to 2022.
https://www.gov.mb.ca/asset_library/en/eac/sd_response.pdf

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This case study was prepared by Anna Kanduth of the Canadian Climate Institute, with staff contributions from Jason Dion, Caroline Lee and Dave Sawyer.

Climate Legislation in Aotearoa/New Zealand

SUMMARY

Aotearoa/New Zealand’s⁵ Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act was passed in 2019 with near- unanimous support. The Act enshrines long-term emissions reduction targets, five-year emissions budgets, as well as a number of governance structures and processes to support their attainment. The Act was largely inspired by the UK’s Climate Change Act and consequently mirrors a number of its core features.

However, Aotearoa/New Zealand departs from the UK in important ways, including by enshrining separate emissions reduction targets for biogenic methane and all other greenhouse gases (GHG), as well as through its emphasis on engagement, recognition, and inclusion of iwi⁶ and Māori throughout the development and implementation of the Act. This case study reviews the defining features of Aotearoa/New Zealand’s legislation.

FEATURES OF AOTEAROA/ NEW ZEALAND’S LEGISLATION

1. Legislating climate accountability processes

Aotearoa/New Zealand’s Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act legislates a climate accountability framework that shares many features with the UK’s Climate Change Act, including: Setting 2050 emissions reduction targets;

Establishing an independent expert advisory body;
Introducing five-year, interim cumulative emissions budgets en route to the long-term target;
Requiring governments to develop action plans to meet budgets, based on a set of considerations laid out in legislation;
Obliging the advisory body and government to regularly monitor and report on progress;
Providing flexibility for government to roll over unused emissions from previous budgets or to—within limits—borrow emissions from successive budgets when targets have been missed; and
Requiring governments to conduct climate change risk assessment and develop adaptation planning.

The legislation requires that all greenhouse gas emissions, other than biogenic methane, be net zero by 2050. Aotearoa/New Zealand’s legislation enshrines a separate set of targets for biogenic methane: a 10 per cent reduction from 2017 levels by 2030 and a reduction of between 24 per cent and 47 per cent below 2017 levels by 2050.

The long-term targets can only be changed if there have been significant developments in global action, science, Aotearoa/New Zealand’s economic or fiscal circumstances, obligations under international agreements, technological developments, distributional impacts, equity implications (including generational equity), risks associated with emissions reductions, or social, cultural, environmental, and ecological circumstances.

2. Clearly defining roles and responsibilities

New Zealand Government Duties

Under the legislation, the Minister responsible for the Act has a statutory duty to set emissions budgets, make plans to attain them, and to meet the targets, as well as to develop plans to adapt to climate change risks. However, neither the 2050 target nor the emissions budgets are legally enforceable. Section 5ZM of the Act explicitly states that “No remedy or relief is available for failure to meet the 2050 target or an emissions budget, and the 2050 target and the emissions budgets are not enforceable in a court of law.” According to the New Zealand Law Society, “a court may only make a declaration that the target or a budget has not been met and award costs” (Ballinger, 2019). In practice, the Minister responsible is New Zealand’s Minister for Climate Change.

Climate Change Commission

The Climate Change Commission (the “Commission”) was established through legislation to provide independent, expert advice to Government on setting emissions budgets as well as on the direction of the policies required to meet them and to adapt to the effects of climate change. The Commission is also responsible for monitoring and reviewing Government’s progress towards its climate change goals. The Commission consists of a Chairperson, a Deputy Chairperson, and five members, who are appointed by the Minister for their expertise. The commissioners are experts in the fields of climate science, adaptation, economics, agriculture, economics, and the Crown-Māori relationship (Climate Change Commission, 2019).

In late 2017, prior to the introduction of the Zero Carbon Bill in Parliament, the Government established an Interim Climate Change Committee to begin work on key areas of climate change. The Interim Committee was responsible for providing independent advice and analysis on issues outlined in the Government’s Terms of Reference, to be passed on to the Climate Change Commission, once established, to inform its recommendations (Interim Climate Change Commission, 2019).

3. Establishing interim emissions reduction milestones

The Act dictates that, starting December 31, 2021, Aotearoa/New Zealand must set five-year emissions budgets at the national level, with three consecutive budgets in place at any time.⁷

An emissions budget can only be revised as a result of methodological improvements in the way emissions are measured and reported or significant changes to the conditions upon which the budget was set (including, but not limited to, scientific advice, technological developments, the results of public consultation, the impacts of actions across regions and communities, the technical or economic feasibility of budgets, and the implications, or potential implications of land-use change for communities). In addition, the revision must be recommended by the Climate Change Commission.

If the total emissions in a budget are lower than the emissions budget for that period, the excess reductions can be carried forward to the next budget period. If total emissions in a budget are greater than the permitted amount, no more than 1 per cent of the next emissions budget can be borrowed.

4. Producing action plans to meet milestones

The Government is required to prepare and make publicly available a plan for how it will meet an emissions budget. The plan may also include policies for meeting future emissions budgets. The Act does not prescribe how the Government must meet its budgets or which policies must be used. However, it does establish a set of considerations that must be taken into account by government when setting targets and establishing plans.

The plan must include at minimum sector-specific policies, multi-sector strategies, adaptation policies, and strategies for minimizing impacts on workers, employers, regions, and communities. Aotearoa/New Zealand’s legislation also dictates that emissions must be met, as far as possible, through domestic emissions reductions as opposed to through international carbon credits.

The Act also dictates that a national climate change risk assessment be prepared every six years to identify and address the risks from a changing Aotearoa/New Zealand climate. The Minister for Climate Change is required to prepare the first National Climate Risk Assessment, with all subsequent assessments prepared by the Commission. In response to each national climate change risk assessment, the Minister must prepare a national adaptation plan that demonstrates how government plans to address those risks.

5. Monitoring and Reporting

The Commission is required to regularly monitor and report on progress towards meeting emissions budgets and the longer-term target. The Commission must prepare annual progress reports that outline emissions reductions and assess the adequacy of current plans. The Minister must publish a response no later than three months after receiving the Commission’s report.

The Commission must also prepare a report to government, due two years after the end of a budget period, which evaluates the progress made in that period and recommends whether banking or borrowing would be appropriate. The Government must make publicly available a response that provides a rationale for any shortfalls as well as any departures from the Commission’s advice.

6. Beyond emissions reductions

The scope of the Act goes beyond emissions reductions to consider climate change risk and adaptation, as well as broader social, economic, and cultural impacts of climate policy. As outlined above, the legislation requires that the Minister prepare and make publicly available a national climate change risk assessment, which must be followed by a national adaptation plan. The national adaptation plan must set out the Government’s objectives, the strategies, policies, and proposals to meet those objectives, the time frames for implementation, as well as the measures and indicators that will enable regular monitoring and reporting.

Beyond adaptation, the Act also ingrains broader social and economic considerations into the process for setting budgets, developing action plans to meet them, and for managing climate change risks. For example, when performing its functions and duties, the Climate Change Commission must take into account a number of considerations, notably:

social, cultural, environmental, and ecological circumstances, including across sectors and regions;
the distribution of costs, benefits, and risks across generations;
the likely economic effects; and
the Crown-Māori relationship.

In addition, the government’s action plan to reduce emissions must include strategies for minimizing impacts on workers, employers, regions, and communities.

LESSONS FOR CANADA

Timeliness of government action plan

The majority of timelines outlined in the Aotearoa/New Zealand Act are aligned with those in the UK Climate Change Act 2008, including setting emissions budgets three at a time and at least a decade in advance. However, unlike the UK Act, Aotearoa/New Zealand’s Act enshrines a set timeframe within which the government must release its action plan to meet the emissions budgets. A legislated deadline ensures governments are accountable for developing policies in a timely manner and avoids undue delay. In the UK case, the absence of such a deadline allowed the government to take fifteen months to publish its action plan for the fifth emissions budget (Fankhauser et al, 2018).

Treating short-lived pollutants differently

As outlined above, Aotearoa/New Zealand’s Act defines two separate emissions reduction targets—one for all GHG, other than biogenic methane, and separate targets for biogenic methane.

In Aotearoa/New Zealand, agriculture is a major driver of the economy, but it is also a significant contributor to the country’s emissions inventory—notably producing considerable amounts of methane. The Act’s two-target approach can be seen as trying to balance the demands of different stakeholder groups and economic sectors with the country’s unique opportunities and costs associated with climate change mitigation, as well as with what climate science can tell us (Reisinger and Leahy, 2019). Nevertheless, it has drawn criticism from both sides of the debate, being condemned as too weak by some (largely environmental groups) and too strong by others (largely the agricultural sector and the Official Opposition). While the wide range set for biogenic methane emissions reductions (between 24 per cent and 47 per cent below 2017 levels by 2050) may have increased buy-in across diverse stakeholders, it does not provide as much certainty and predictability for the agriculture sector as would a more definitive target. In addition, the Act does not make clear how biogenic methane factors into the five-year emissions budgets.

Despite debate over the level at which Aotearoa/New Zealand’s methane targets were set, the approach of treating short-lived pollutants (like methane) and long-lived pollutants (like carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide) differently merits consideration. Whereas emissions from long-lived pollutants stay in the atmosphere for hundreds to thousands of years, methane has a much shorter lifetime in the atmosphere, on average 12 years (USEPA, 2020). But it is an extremely potent pollutant, trapping over 70 times more heat than the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide over a 20-year period (ECCC, 2019). As short- and long-lived pollutants have different life cycles and impacts, there may be value in treating them differently, including through separate emissions reduction targets and budgets.

In Canada, methane is the second most common GHG, accounting for 15 per cent of Canada’s total GHG emissions. The oil and gas sector is the largest industrial polluter of methane emissions in Canada, with landfills, wastewater, animal waste management, and coal mining being other key contributors (ECCC, 2019). While in Aotearoa/New Zealand, nearly all methane is biogenic—presenting different emissions reduction opportunities and costs than methane emissions from, say, the oil and gas sector—governments here may nevertheless wish to learn from Aotearoa/New Zealand’s experience to determine whether setting separate emissions reduction targets and budgets is a useful approach in the Canadian context.

Early and frequent engagement with Indigenous Peoples

In Aotearoa/New Zealand, the Government worked closely with iwi and Māori representative organizations throughout the development of the Zero Carbon Bill. The legislation features frequent consultation and engagement with Māori and iwi representatives, consideration of traditional knowledge, as well as recognition of the Treaty of Waitangi—an agreement signed in 1840 between the Crown and Māori chiefs that establishes and guides the Crown-Māori relationship (The University of Melbourne, 2020). For example, the legislation requires that:

The government’s emissions reduction plans include a strategy to recognize and mitigate the impacts of emissions reduction actions on iwi and Māori as well as ensuring that they have been adequately consulted on the plan;
The national adaptation plan takes into account the economic, social, health, environmental, ecological and cultural impacts of climate change on iwi and Māori;
Particular attention is paid to seeking nominations for the Climate Change Commission from iwi and Māori representative organization; and
Before recommending appointment of a member to the Commission, the minister considers the need to have members who have technical and professional skills, experience, and expertise relevant to the Treaty of Waitangi, as well as the Māori world, customs, language, and traditional knowledge.

Although the legislation requires that members of the Commission have understanding and expertise relating to Māori rights and traditional knowledge, the legislation does not explicitly require Māori representation. However, Māori leaders pressed the Government to have a voice at the table and ultimately, an Indigenous representative was appointed as Deputy Chair of the Commission. The Aotearoa/ New Zealand Māori Council came out in support of the Zero Carbon Act in advance of its passing in Parliament (Scoop News, 2019).

While Aotearoa/New Zealand’s experience can offer helpful lessons for Canada, it should not be replicated without due consideration here, since its approach is suited to its own context. There are profound differences between the experience of Indigenous peoples across and within both countries—including historical context, constitutional and treaty rights, culture, language, and diversity—that must be acknowledged. Governments in Canada should strive for the highest standard of representation and inclusion of Indigenous peoples.

REFERENCES

Ballinger, Duncan. 2019. “The Zero Carbon Bill – a framework for New Zealand’s climate change journey.” New Zealand Law Society. 30 August 2019.
https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/practice-resources/practice- areas/environmental-law/the-zero-carbon-bill-a-f ramework-for-new-zealands-climate-change-journey

Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2019/0061/latest/whole.html#LMS183736 Climate Change Commission. 2019. “Home.” https://www.climatecommission.govt.nz/

Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2019. “About methane emissions.” Government of Canada.
https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/global-methane- initiative/about-methane-emissions.html

Fankhauser, Sam, Alina Averchenkova and Jared Finnegan. 2018. 10 Years of the UK Climate Change Act. The Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment and The Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy.
http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/wp-content/ uploads/2018/03/10-Years-of-the-UK-Climate-Change-Act_Fankhauser-et-al.pdf

Generation Zero. 2019. “Zero Carbon Act – FAQ.” https://zerocarbonact.nz/faq/

Interim Climate Change Committee. 2019. “Our Work.” https://www.iccc.mfe.govt.nz/what-we-do/our-work/

McLachlan, Robert. 2019. “NZ Introduces Groundbreaking Zero Carbon Bill, Including Targets for Agricultural Methane.” The Conversation, 8 May 2019. https://theconversation.com/nz-introduces- groundbreaking-zero-carbon-bill-including-targets-for-agricultural-methane-116724

Reisinger, Andy and Sinead Leahy. 2019. Scientific aspects of New Zealand’s 2050 emissions targets: A note on scientific and technical issues related to the Zero Carbon Bill. New Zealand Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research Centre.
https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/52SCEN_EVI_87861_ EN6883/b5b7958b4909176cf1571434eaa7776bcc35e4bd

Scoop News. 2019. “NZ Māori Council Backs Zero Carbon Bill.” 9 May 2019. https://www.scoop.co.nz/ stories/PO1905/S00120/nz-maori-council-backs-zero-carbon-bill.htm

The University of Melbourne. 2020. “New Zealand Law Guide: Treaty of Waitangi.”
https://unimelb. libguides.com/NewZealandLaw/treaty

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2020. “Overview of Greenhouse Gases: Methane Emissions.”
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases

Walls, Jason. 2019. “Controversial Biological Methane Target in Zero Carbon Bill Unchanged despite Lobbying.” NZ Herald, 21 October 2019. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_ id=1&objectid=12278436

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This case study was prepared by Anna Kanduth of the Canadian Climate Institute, with staff contributions from Jason Dion and Caroline Lee.

Introduction

Laying the Groundwork

1. Creating Grounded Opportunities: The White Owl Sugar Bush

2. Learning on the Land: Partnering with Educational Institutions

3. Building Community within Urban Spaces: The Uniroyal Goodrich Park

Continuing to Grow and Learn from the Land and Community

About the authors

References

Introduction

Glossary of Gitanyow terms

Gitanyow Nation: Governance and Territory

Wilp Sustainability Approach

Responding to the Complexity of Climate Change

Environmental Flows and Water Quality

Glacier Surveys and Mapping

Water Policy

Conclusion

Recommendations

For Indigenous governing organizations:

For Indigenous and settler watershed managers:

For Crown governments:

About the authors

References

Summary

Introduction

The unnatural disasters of colonialism and displacement

Climate change and disaster displacement

The history of Siksika Nation

The 2013 flood disaster in Siksika Nation

A long road home: Five phases of disaster displacement

Phase 1: Initial response from evacuees – confusion and makeshift housing (June 21–end of June, 2013)

Phase 2: Hotel lodging and gaps in access to services (July–August, 2013)

Phase 3: ATCO trailers (September 2013–2015)

Phase 4: New Temporary Neighbourhoods (Starting June 2016)

Phase 5: Still searching for home after disaster displacement (Starting in 2017)

Reflections from an Elder: What we have lost due to the disaster

Self-determination and disaster recovery

Conclusions

About the authors

References

SUMMARY

INGREDIENTS OF CLEAN GROWTH IN NOVA SCOTIA

Figure 1: GDP, Employment, and GHG emissions, Nova Scotia, 2005-2018

1. Fuel switching in the electricity sector

2. Energy efficiency gains

3. Clean tech sector growth

4. Climate-related infrastructure investment

Figure 2: Investment Flows for Select Infrastructure Categories (2009-2019)

5. A gradual shift from emissions-intensive goods toward services

Figure 3: Changes in GDP and Employment across Select Sectors in Nova Scotia (2005–2018)

CHALLENGES IN MAKING FUTURE PROGRESS

1. Declining goods-production and high unemployment in small, rural communities

Figure 4: Unemployment Rate by Population Centre (2016)

BOX 1: Mobile workers in Cape Breton

2. Reducing economy-wide emissions and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050

3. Ensuring Nova Scotia households have affordable energy

Figure 5: Share of Household Expenditures on Energy (2017)

4. Improving air quality in rural Nova Scotia

Figure 6: Annual Average Ground-level Ozone (top) and Fine Particulate Matter Emissions (bottom) (2017-18)

CONCLUSIONS & LESSONS LEARNED

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

REFERENCES

SUMMARY

FEATURES OF B.C.’S LEGISLATION

LESSONS FOR CANADA

REFERENCES

SUMMARY

FEATURES OF MANITOBA’S LEGISLATION

LESSONS FOR CANADA

REFERENCES

SUMMARY

FEATURES OF AOTEAROA/ NEW ZEALAND’S LEGISLATION

LESSONS FOR CANADA

REFERENCES