Policy leaders and decision makers occupy two separate realities when it comes to thinking about the concept of ‘transition’ in Canada’s energy system. This was the central finding in a study released in March by the Positive Energy program at the University of Ottawa.
Positive Energy researcher Dr. Marisa Beck, the report’s lead author, uncovered the two distinct perspectives by asking over 40 energy and environmental leaders about their use and interpretation of the term “transition”.
Individuals within both realities agree Canada is undergoing an energy transition of some kind, she found. However, they disagree on the necessary pace and scope of transition. One reality views “transition” as a gradual process that will be driven largely by market forces, with a diverse energy portfolio that includes oil and gas. The other reality views “transition” as a set of broader social and political changes that must occur quickly, with a phaseout of oil and gas, and emissions reduction targets that should be as aggressive as necessary to hold global temperature increases below 2 degrees Celsius.
The report suggests that “transition” is not a particularly useful term in conversations about Canada’s energy future. Those interviewed tended to agree that it is either too vague, non-inclusive, or even pejorative, to foster productive conversations. However, some noted that the term is open enough that it can be a starting point to bring groups with diverging interests together.
The researchers feel the study’s findings are crucial for those interested in addressing polarization in Canadian energy and climate debates. They suggest that those convening dialogues or developing policy about Canada’s energy future should begin by focusing on areas of convergence to build bridges between the two realities. Moving beyond polarization will be nearly impossible if decision-makers fail to acknowledge critical differences between these two visions.
What is “Transition? The two realities of energy and environmental leaders in Canada” is available here.
See also the article below on polarization around energy policy in Alberta.