Abstract: It was 20 years ago that Canadian provinces and territories, along side the federal government, signed the Accord for Protection of Species at Risk in Canada. Since 1996 there has been limited progress at fulfilling the main objectives of the Accord. By now, all jurisdictions should have stand-alone species at risk policies that are consistent with each other and consistent with federal policy. Unfortunately, only six provinces and one territory have such policies in place and only three of those were created after the federal policy. Thus, there is a lack of policy and a lack of consistency across jurisdictions.

Abstract: What effect will the Energy East Pipeline have on global, downstream greenhouse gas emissions? In addition to Energy East, other new pipelines and rail transport are at various stages of development across an integrated North American oil transport system. Accordingly, in this paper, after review global oil prices and Canadian oil production, we undertake a political risk analysis in order to build seven counterfactual scenarios of future of pipeline & rail infrastructure. Second, we estimate the impact of Energy East on global emissions relative to each counterfactual scenario using a simple model drawing on global oil supply and demand elasticities. Our findings indicate an important range of results depending on assumptions about the viability of new pipeline proposals and substitutability between pipeline and rail. However, the most likely counterfactual scenario against which to measure the effects of Energy East is one where limited new pipeline (two of four alternative pipelines are constructed) and limited new rail transport are realized (850 TBD) are built by 2035. Under these conditions, we estimate Energy East to increase global emission by 40-50 MtCO2e per year. Under this scenario, the Energy East pipeline is expected to cause 640-800 MtCO2e of emissions to be emitted 16 years earlier than would otherwise be the case. To the extent that our findings differ from other studies of Energy East’s impact on global oil consumption and emissions, it is largely because we do not assume perfect substitutability between pipeline and rail transport.

Abstract: "The paper investigates the influence of institutional design on the dynamics of political conflict in federal systems. It utilizes a cross-national case comparison of Indigenous land-claims groups to compare how variation in the design of new federal components affects inter- and intra-group dynamics and political conflict. The paper utilizes institutional differences between Canadian and US models of land claim settlement that can be traced back to the advent of the modern land claim in the Alaska Native Claim Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971. ANCSA was the first attempt at a new model that transferred significant land and monetary resources and established new institutions of regional governance (the ANCSA Regional Corporations), but which split up distinct Indigenous polities. When Canada similarly moved toward recognizing Indigenous rights under modern treaties, its model of institutional creation incorporated the corporate model under a system of identity-based governance. To test how differences in institutions affect the dynamics of political conflict, this paper will conduct a comparative case analysis of four land-claims regions—the Inuvialuit and Gwich’in regions in the Northwest Territories, and the Northwest Arctic and North Slope regions in Alaska—on their management of policy reversal. In all four cases, local Indigenous leadership reversed their position on the suitability of key resource development projects that informed (or inspired) the land claims movement of the 1960s and 1970s. The paper will use qualitative methods—including interviews, coded text analysis, and process tracing—to compare the impact of institutions on the regional politics of resource development."

Abstract: Canada is back. That is the statement Prime Minister Justin Trudeau delivered at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of the Parties in Paris at the end of 2015. Over the last decade, however, the provinces have carried the load on climate change in Canada. A range of policies have been established at the provincial level including carbon taxes in BC and Alberta; a cap-and-trade program in Quebec, with commitments from Ontario and Manitoba to develop similar systems; and strategies to reduce coal-burning for electricity generation and promote renewable energy in most jurisdictions. Some provinces even sought to coordinate their responses through voluntary agreements with each other and US states, such as the Western Climate Initiative (WCI). With the federal government looking to re-engage on climate change policy, Canada is now at a cross-roads. What lessons can be learned from the provinces, how can their leadership be built upon and what should the relationship between the two levels of government be moving forward?This paper examines the experience of five provinces that developed innovative policy solutions to address climate change (BC, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Alberta) and their efforts to voluntarily coordinate their responses. The paper highlights variation in provincial responses while suggesting that voluntary collaboration provides a foothold on which future cooperation can be built. Given the work that provinces have done, Ottawa should work with provinces to facilitate a flexible national solution rather than impose a one-size-fits-all federal policy. In short, Trudeau’s role should be closer to that of a headwaiter to the provinces, the phrase his father famously chastised Joe Clark with decades ago, as opposed to a headmaster.

Paper / Communication