Canadian environmental policy has been quite revolutionary over the last decade and our country has taken the initiative in helping to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases over that time frame. Canada is dedicated to meeting its targets in regards to this greenhouse gas emission goal and also in meeting the requirements set forth by the Kyoto Protocol. This information is explained clearly and succinctly on the environmental website of Canada.
On that site, the environmental mission is laid out as (2007), “Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Monitoring, Accounting and Reporting encompasses the institutional, legal and procedural arrangements necessary to ensure that Canada meets its United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Kyoto Protocol reporting obligations” (p. 1). Still, more than just a website is required in order to keep the stakeholders of the country in good spirits over the issue of greenhouse gas emissions.We must consider a number of different scenarios that keep these people involved, including public and private meetings with a number of different groups.
A certain amount of political savvy and a strong environmental policy are the two things necessary to drive this effort forward and secure a strong environmental relationship between Canada and those groups that make their living by supporting the fight for environmental rights. These approaches are fundamentally necessary to not only keep stakeholders informed about what we are trying to do, but to also send a clear message that Canada takes these things seriously.By taking an open door approach, Canada will be emphasizing the fact that it does not have anything to hide and ultimately, wants to be a part of the solution. Though many different approaches have been considered in this regard, the ones that we will be taking include multi-stakeholder consultation, citizen suits, private meetings with various interest groups, as well as considering our own policies without the interference from outside groups.
This is an important detail that we must consider because it will help add balance to the environmental policies that we will ultimately be touting.The Canadian government must meet with multiple stake holders from different walks of life in order to make sure that we are not neglecting the opinion of the common man or woman in Canada. They are the ones who not only vote, but have to live through the environmental policies that we ultimately undertake. In addition, this will hopefully help to heal the perception that exists in the mainstream media about government and environmental politics.
Though Canada has not specifically been a huge part of the problem, the media likes to characterize all governments in this regard and this ultimately effects public perception.This clear media distaste can be found in a September Canadian Press article by Terry Pedwell. In that article, Pedwell writes (2007), “Prime Minister Stephen Harper reached a "fraudulent" agreement on climate change with his fellow Asia-Pacific leaders, say the leaders of Green parties in Canada and Australia” (p. 1). This is clearly a concern, as media perception can do much to harm the environmental effort. With that in mind, we will be dealing specifically with a number of different stakeholders in an attempt to get their opinions on greenhouse gas emission.
The interesting thing about this approach is that in regards to this particular issue, the stakeholder base is very large and very diverse. Whereas other issues might have a much smaller group of stakeholders, environmental issues and greenhouse gas emissions is different. Everyone has a vested interest in protecting the environment, as research has shown that the consequences of not protecting the environment could be quite dire. In addition to getting the opinion of the common man, we must also take into account other individual stakeholders who might have a different interest in the issue.We should meet with automobile manufacturers, as well as all sorts of other manufacturing company leaders. Car companies are usually identified as the primary culprits in the production and emission of greenhouse gasses.
Though the Green Lane’s website shows that Canada’s emission of such combustible fuels is not off the charts, they are still a concern. In order to truly shape an effective environmental policy for the future, we have to understand how that policy will affect these companies. We have to understand what a proposed cut in the emission of greenhouse gases would do to their business.On top of that, there is a much more important issue in play. While it is our job to care what affect a proposed action might have on the individual companies, we must also consider what impact it might have on the economy as a whole. With this in mind, it will be in our best interest to consult the Canadian Economics Association to get their opinion on the potential impact to the economy at large.
By including this varied group of stakeholders, our policy will reflect the balance that we ultimately hope to project.In addition, we will be getting new information from experts and from concerned citizens, which is always a plus when dealing with new policy matters. The politics behind environmental policy are quite complicated because they include a plethora of different interests and interest groups. Norman Miller writes in his book, Environmental Politics: Interest Groups, the Media, and the Making of Policy, that (2001) “Because environmental issues affect us in such profound ways and involve such a multiplicity of interests, they subject the legislative process to its greatest strains.
Over the course of the last quarter century or so, the body of laws enacted in the environmental area have influenced almost every aspect of our daily lives and mandated the appropriation of more public and private monies than the body of laws in any other area” (p. 17). This simple portion of the Miller book indicates the overall importance of environmental policy in a number of different areas, which is why it is so difficult to come up with a good, comprehensive policy on the matter. With that in mind, we have to sit down and consider the thoughts presented by special interest groups.The most powerful and most important environmental special interest group in the world is GreenPeace, so it is important that we have a meaning with them. As the minister of the environment, you are the face and brains behind our entire outfit, so the meetings must be conducted by you with the head of that group.
Greenpeace is a group that is always looking for a headline and is always looking for attention, so they will be happy to sit down for a meeting to suggest their agenda. It is important that we have expectations for such a meeting, though.When meeting with GreenPeace, we must understand that it is in their best interest to suggest the most stringent greenhouse gas emission standards possible. Even though their recommendations might not be possible, it is important to gather as much information as possible and they are the perfect group to give this type of information. By meeting with GreenPeace, we will be showing a public commitment to understanding the political stance of hard line environmental activists and we will be working hard to understand as much about greenhouse gas emissions as we can.
These meetings have to be conducted in a private forum, though. If we were to go forward with any sort of public meeting with these people, we could run the risk of looking insensitive if we do not conform to what might be unreasonable expectations. A private meeting provides less risk and still accomplishes the goal that this alternative solution sets out to achieve. We might also consider some other meetings with environmental special interest groups, as well.A book by Alex Wellington, Allan Greenbaum, and Wesley Cragg, there is a break down of the difference in these special interest groups and other local groups that do not have as much pull in the international community.
In the book, Canadian Issues in Environmental Ethics, the authors write (1997), “In this respect, companies resemble other intentional communities, such as environmental special interest groups, and can be distinguished from organic communities, such as indigenous or local communities” (p. 69).It is important that we only hold these important meetings with real special interest groups that have actual pull in the Canadian government, so that we do not have to deal with frivolous or useless meetings. The environmental policy of the United States is not perfect, but it is something that we should keep an eye on when shaping our own policy. One thing that they have been sure to include is the provision for citizen suits. In short, this gives the citizens of our country the power to take action if they feel that the environmental code is not being protected.
In short, citizens could sue any person on the basis that the person’s actions are harming them. Though frivolous litigation is a concern when this type of thing is put into the code, it is an absolute must in giving the people a chance to voice their opinions and protect their own interests. In our meetings with various stakeholders, it will become clear that this is a very important aspect that cannot be left out under any circumstances. The State Environmental Resource Center gave a rave review of this provision in the American environmental code.
In that literature, it read, “The citizen suit has become a staple of federal environmental law, as nearly every major environmental statute provides for citizen suits. In general, these provisions allow any citizen to sue any person to enforce the specific requirements or limitations of the environmental protection statute” (SERC). This important consideration will add some political flexibility to our case, as it gives the common man more rights and capabilities when it comes to the environment. On top of these things, we have to consider our own interests in forming the policy for the Canadian government.Though the opinions of the stakeholders are certainly important, we have to take our own views on the policy, as well.
With that in mind, closed door meetings must be held between those people that will ultimately be shaping the policy. This should be done before any of the other things are done, so that the opinions of those within the meeting are not shaped by a meeting with a special interest group or with a stakeholder. After the entire evaluation process is completed, this information can and should be consulted before the policy is written.That will create balance between the opinion of special interest groups and the opinion of the government. In the end, it is our job to do what is best for the Canadian people, and that may or may not be the same as the recommendation from any stakeholder. These alternative approaches will provide a very important bit of perspective to our economic policy.
With something so important, we have to not only take into the statistics and the facts, but also the politics that are at work within the global environmental society.If we fail to take these things into account, the resulting fallout could be devastating. Though the most important thing is to get the policy right, in the end, we have to protect our interests on a number of fronts. That is why such a comprehensive approach is the best approach prior to writing an environmental policy of this magnitude. Pacification of various groups, including GreenPeace and the general stakeholders, must be our primary concern along with shaping a policy that helps protect both the present in addition to the future.
