Vancouver, Canada (GLOBE-Net) – Environmental leadership has become the key political issue in recent months. Leaders both in Canada and in the United States appear to have finally got the message that people really are concerned about global warming and are primed to vote for those who demonstrate the leadership to do something about it. Even the Prime Minister has acknowledged his government was too slow off the mark in giving to Canadians the type of leadership on environmental matters they wanted. While some might confuse action with progress, it is clear to most Canadians that the recent flurry of environment related announcements are catch-up measures. They don’t yet constitute the bold actions that will be required if Canada is to regain its international stature as an environmental leader.

Without diminishing the good things that could result from federal funding for technology development, energy efficiency, or wilderness protection, a series of disconnected announcements is not synonymous with environmental leadership. To their credit, the key federal ministers involved know this, and much more is being promised.

But leadership is a tricky business, particularly on environmental and energy matters. As is apparent both in Canada and elsewhere, it does not always come from a nation’s capital.

States and provinces leading the way

In the United States, real leadership on environmental matters recently has been coming from lower levels of government. Perhaps because they are closer to the people they govern, leaders at lower levels of government (state and municipal) appear to be aligning themselves with more progressive action in recent years.

Leaders such as California’s Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger are reaping the political benefits of giving voters and businesses what they want – a realistic vision for change, a clear plan for a sustainable future, and bold actions that create new jobs and economic wealth by demonstrating leadership on environment and sustainability. As it did in the past with respect to auto emissions, California is changing the economic and cultural landscape of America with its bold plan to cut industrial greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.

Other US states are also making waves. A group of seven northeast states have formed the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), implementing a cap and trade system which will limit greenhouse gas emissions to 2006 levels beginning in 2009, followed by another ten percent cut by 2019. The RGGI states have found a friend in California, which will integrate its own cap and trade system with the group’s carbon trading program.

And leadership is being shown at the local level too. Seattle’s Mayor Greg Nickels was the first leader of a major US city to endorse emissions reductions. He helped launch a challenge to cities across the country to take action to significantly reduce pollution causing global warming. Today 369 US mayors representing in excess of 55 million Americans have taken up the challenge.

Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago has set a goal to make Chicago the ‘greenest city’ in America. At GLOBE 2006, Daley outlined what it takes to make a city sustainable, i.e. a city that minimizes its long-term impact on the environment while maximizing the quality of life for its residents. Leadership by example was at the top of his list.

Only a handful of provincial and municipal governments in Canada have stepped up to the plate with similar environmental initiatives.

Quebec has been vocal in its support for greenhouse gas emissions reductions, vowing to reach a target of 6 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-2012. The province’s twenty-four point climate change plan will be partially funded by a royalty (read ‘carbon tax’) on hydrocarbons totalling around $200 million a year. The tax and other measures will be the most stringent in Canada. In this way Québec hopes to lead the country on practical measures to deal with climate change.

The motivation for these moves comes largely from increased public pressure as the realities of climate change become clearer to a wider audience. Québec voters overwhelmingly favour reducing emissions, and the province also stands to benefit from exploiting its vast potential for hydroelectric and wind power.

Other provinces are moving forward in this regard as well. British Columbia is working on a new energy plan for the province which is expected to place much greater emphasis on renewable energy.

Ontario’s Standard Offer Program for renewable energy is another demonstration of environmental leadership from the bottom up. The province has launched one of North America’s strongest programs to promote wind, solar, and biomass energy by kick starting the renewables market through standardized and locked in prices for renewable energy. The province is experiencing strong growth in wind and solar power, and is attracting investment through its leading edge policies. Ontario communities and businesses will reap benefits from this initiative for years to come, as energy companies deploy their technologies and consumers benefit from lower-cost clean energy.

The challenge now is to link these important initiatives to comprehensive national, North American and global leadership. This will take a deeper understanding of the political and economic opportunities and a willingness to look beyond traditional parameters to spot the emerging solutions.

Results bring product changes to consumers

The impacts of environmental leadership can be significant and widespread, resulting in changes that directly influence other jurisdictions. Europe passed its landmark REACH legislation late in 2006, requiring importers and manufacturers of chemicals to provide health and safety data for some 30,000 substances currently used in everyday products. The rules go beyond those in any other jurisdiction worldwide, and along with two other pieces of legislation - RoHS (Restriction on the use of Certain Hazardous Substances) and WEEE (Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment) – will make Europe the global trendsetter for toxic chemicals regulation.

Since the rules cover all products sold in the European Union, global companies have to adjust their products which are destined for that market. Considering the size of the EU’s economy and anticipating follow-on regulations in other countries, many companies have chosen to adjust their entire global supply chains. Companies such as Dell and HP have committed to significantly reducing toxic chemical use in all of their products, largely encouraged by the European regulations.

While REACH was in development, other countries including Canada and the United States launched their own efforts to curb the use of toxic chemicals. Canada’s Chemical Management Plan was introduced soon after REACH. The Conservative Government deserves credit for taking swift action in this area. The European Union was only slightly ahead of the curve, but its research to develop the new regulations clearly has impacted on other countries as well as its own industries.

Europe has also taken the lead in tackling electronic waste (“e-waste”) as well. Europe’s legislation on electronic waste was profiled at recent meetings of the Basel Convention on hazardous waste. Following the European lead, Alberta was the first province in Canada to introduce a fee-based system for the collection and recycling of old computers, televisions, and printers. British Columbia and other provinces are following suit with similar programs based on industry led Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR).

The Benefits are Real

Environmental leadership shown in these jurisdictions demonstrates there is much to gain from green measures. In the same way a corporation gains a competitive advantage by being the first-mover in a new market, governments can make gains – political, social and economic - by leading the way. By promoting clean energy Ontario will be able to mitigate its rising energy demands while reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and can also create a booming provincial renewables industry.

There are many levers already available to governments that can lead to significant environmental benefits. For example, the federal government is by far the largest purchaser in the Canadian economy, buying in excess of $20 billion in goods and services each year. Yet it does not fully use this massive purchasing power to create new markets for innovative home-grown technologies or to promote sustainable business practices. Even Wal-Mart, is more aggressive in using its admittedly much larger purchasing power to create new markets and to bring about more sustainable business practices in its 60,000 member global supply chain.

Being the first to have a strong climate change policy could help a region or country to become a hub for low emissions technologies that in turn will attract new investment. Power utilities in the European Union are gaining experience in the carbon trading market and in emissions reduction strategies because of the EU’s emissions trading plan.

Even though many political leaders find the idea of being ahead of the pack in environmental protection unsettling, the combination of political will, broad public support and economic and environmental conditions can coalesce to create opportunities for pioneering initiatives. The California example has proven this.

There are obvious political gains as well. Backed by science and faced with federal inaction, leaders such as California’s Schwarzenegger and newly elected New York Governor Eliot Spitzer gained political favour by pushing ambitious environmental agendas. Polling shows that the green tinge to their election campaigns was a decisive factor in their respective victories.

Time for a National Vision

Polls have placed the environment at the top of the list of concerns of Canadians, along with health care and education, and it is clear our political leaders have got the message. Clearly, we shall see more activity in this arena as party leaders position themselves to be at the epicentre of the green movement. Yet there is still something missing in terms of environmental leadership in Canada, something that no amount of ad hoc spending or program announcements can replace.

What is missing is a true vision of a sustainable Canada, a vision that Canadians can believe in and adopt as their own. No party is currently offering a comprehensive vision. Canadians are seeking leadership from their governments on issues related to climate change, environmental protection, energy security, clean air, sustainable cities, and international respect. They want a country that is worthy of its green image, proud of vast unspoiled wilderness, secure in the bounty of its natural resources, and an economy that is energy self sufficient. And they want a realistic plan to achieve all these things and if recent polls are correct, Canadians understand more clearly now that they must be willing to pay to make it happen. But there’s still a long way to go to match intent with reality.

The stage for change is set. And the political leader that most clearly defines an achievable vision of a sustainable future in Canada - economically, environmentally and socially - likely will gain the balance of power in the upcoming election. Climate change is the top environmental issue of the day for most Canadians, so it is in this arena where governments stand to gain the most.

All parties have signalled they intend to take action on several fronts and the choice for voters will be how much change – and at what cost. Each party will offer solutions for energy efficiency, new technology, renewable energy and better buildings or products.

The most critical factor may be a comprehensive national emissions reduction plan tied to a domestic cap-and-trade system. The creation of a functional carbon trading market which allows Canadian industry to participate in current and future global climate change efforts could be the key. Rather than a patchwork of cap and trade plans and carbon trading vehicles as has happened in the United States, the federal government would do well to introduce a clear national emissions plan to take the country forward – potentially even linked to a North American market.

Meeting our Kyoto commitments is not really the issue. Recent polls show that most Canadians are not truly wedded to meeting our Kyoto commitments – most people don’t understand Kyoto in any event. What they are looking for is convincing action and leadership to do what is right for all Canadians, with no favourites such as the oil and gas sector.

The opportunity exists for Canada to regain its international reputation as a leader in sustainable development. What is needed from political, business and civic leaders is a vision for a ‘Sustainable Canada’ and a realistic strategy or plan to achieve that vision. To date we have seen only bits and pieces of a plan. We have not seen a broad national strategy, nor has any political or corporate leader articulated a realistic vision for a sustainable future in Canada.

There is an old maxim in military leadership that goes – “Lead, Follow or Get out of the Way!” There are many in our nation’s boardrooms and at cabinet tables in capitals across the country that would do well to consider this maxim. They should decide whether they will be leaders or followers, because the public mood in Canada appears to be most unforgiving at the moment, and those who will neither lead nor follow may simply be moved out of the way by their customers, shareholders or electorates.

John D. Wiebe
President & CEO of the Globe Foundation

---