A more joined-up approach from Canada’s municipalities, provinces and national government would aid sustainable business
A more joined-up approach from Canada’s municipalities, provinces and national government would aid sustainable businessWithin seconds of the earthquake that shook central Canada in early 2010, there were dozens of tweets about the tremors. One witty poster speculated that the cause of the earth’s rumbling was Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper trying to pronounce the word “environment” in the lead-up to the G20 summit. This captures the current mood when it comes to the federal stance on the environment.
Earlier that same day Jim Prentice, federal environment minister, said all new coal-fired electricity power facilities, and those “dated and dirty” ones reaching the end of their “economic life”, must meet stringent performance standards.
But many units will not reach the end of their economic lives until 2025, and 18 of 51 existing units are expected to operate well beyond this timeline. As Marlo Raynolds, executive director of the Calgary-based Pembina Institute, a sustainable energy thinktank, points out, Canada has “a track record of announcing targets and then not really doing much”.
The federal government has announced new regulations for transport trucks, and here at least business is taking note. Probably in anticipation of tighter regulations, Canadian Tire announced in May that 30 trucks would be replaced by the end of the year with low-emissions diesel vehicles, with its entire fleet of 70 to follow by 2013. The net impact of this activity is perhaps relatively small, but this is a trend across major retailers as they seek to optimise their logistics and tell a good news story.
Rigorous regulation
More good news is that, despite the perception of many of its citizens, Canada has stringent safety protocols for chemicals. According to Health Canada, in 2006, Canada was the first country to systematically sort through 23,000 existing substances introduced before the creation of stronger environmental legislation. A management plan has been developed, including a “challenge to industry” in which 200 chemical substances are identified as the highest priorities for risk assessment and controls.
This approach may be progressive when compared with other governments, but it is not fast enough for some businesses. In the wake of consumer concerns about chemical compound bisphenol A (BPA), outdoor-gear retailer Mountain Equipment Co-op pulled products containing BPA in December 2007, and many other retailers followed suit. To date, Health Canada has only required industry to stop selling baby bottles made with BPA.
Other government efforts address the shortfall in reporting and transparency. Several provincial governments now require disclosures through securities regulations, helping companies and investors minimise exposure to social and environmental risks.
A resolution was unanimously approved by the Ontario legislature in April last year, calling on the Ontario Securities Commission to undertake a broad consultation to establish best practice corporate social responsibility and environmental, social and governance reporting standards. Several other provinces have indicated they will follow suit.
So it’s not the Harper government winning kudos for fostering environmental responsibility. Provinces are filling the void.
Along with the increase in disclosure requirements, Ontario’s Green Energy Act, passed in May last year, is intended to boost investment in renewable energy projects, increase conservation and, as an added bonus, create 50,000 new jobs.
British Columbia recently passed its own Clean Energy Act, which has a similar mandate and is tied to a climate action plan.
Wasted effort
The theme of local versus regional or national control is reinforced by the approach to waste management, which serves as a microcosm of Canada’s larger sustainability challenges.
Common sense suggests that products should be made in such a way that they can be responsibly consumed and disposed of. Extensive national efforts in extended producer responsibility for products, from paint to fizzy drinks bottles, support this idea but waste management is handled at the municipal level.
In Ontario, Canada’s most populous province at more than 13 million people, there are 444 municipalities each with its own waste management plan. In other words, where residents in one household may be able to recycle their yogurt containers, in another they go straight to landfill.
For retail and consumer products companies trying to do the right thing, it can be nigh on impossible to effectively manage the life-cycle impacts of their goods, much less inform consumers accurately.
According to GlobeScan Radar 2009, 52% of Canadians feel that the government’s responsibility for various social areas is more important than that of the large companies. Yet the pace of improving regulation makes the retreat of glaciers look speedy, and the lack of leadership at the federal level suggests the fragmented approach will continue.
In this climate business can pick and choose where they will move ahead of regulation, and which of the few encouraging progressive programmes they will invest in.