Alberta’s Climate Leadership Plan (CLP), enacted by the province’s former NDP government under Premier Rachel Notley, was in part a success and in part a failure, and there are useful lessons to be drawn from both sides of the outcome. That’s the conclusion of a recent case study by Positive Energy at the University of Ottawa.
The study’s particular focus is on the causes, effects and ways of dealing with polarization in matters of public policy, and it sought to identify principles applicable in other fields of public interest. The report brings to light a number of significant observations on the subject.
The CLP sought to institute fundamental change in Alberta’s energy and environment policy. As Positive Energy’s case study says, it was also an attempt to reduce a polarization that had arisen around energy and environment policy in Alberta as well as the rest of Canada. The study describes the policy as having mixed results: much of the plan has remained in place provincially in some respect, despite the change in government, and it further influenced the Trudeau government’s policies in the same areas. But it failed at reducing the climate of polarization in the province – “While polarization at the expert level in Alberta was reduced, polarization was exacerbated in three respects: the mass public level in both Alberta and Canada, among political parties in Alberta and Canada, and between Alberta and the rest of Canada.”
As the study summarizes it, internally “The CLP created a large backlash in Alberta and was a major reason for the NDP losing power in 2019. This backlash was due to several reasons: a high degree of anti-tax sentiment in Alberta (the only province without a sales tax), a major economic recession in Alberta, a split between the oil and gas companies and the environmental organizations who supported the CLP and those that did not, the delays in constructing the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, policies of the Trudeau government perceived to be anti-energy, challenges in properly communicating the CLP, the existence of a minority of Albertans who doubted the science around climate change, and the twin elections of Donald Trump in the United States and John Horgan in British Columbia [with an anti-pipeline agenda].”
But even though the CLP’s most important element, the economy-wide carbon tax, was dismantled by the next government at the first opportunity, the other three major components remain largely in effect: a phase-out of coal-fired power plants, a 100 megatonne cap on oil sands emissions, and a mandated reduction in methane emissions.
The case study comments that one reason for the CLP’s partial success was a significant “policy resilience” – “a policy is resilient when there is strong opposition to its creation, a major political party actively campaigns against it in a subsequent election, that party wins the election in large part due to its opposition to the specific policy, but once taking office is either unwilling or unable to substantively change the policy.” For example, the coal phaseout was underway in any case as gas was replacing coal for reasons related to price.
Among other reasons for the CLP’s partial success, the study found several factors:
• Within Alberta, there was broad agreement at the elite level – business leaders in the sector, environmental groups and others with a studied understanding of the issues. But that understanding left the general public behind.
• There was a window of opportunity, after 44 years of PC dominance, to introduce a robust climate change strategy in Alberta, to do something big on energy and the environment. In 2017 the newly elected Notley government benefited from some of the important groundwork for a climate plan in Alberta laid by Premier Jim Prentice. This was quickly followed by the election of the Liberal Party at the national level, which also committed itself to action on climate change.
In summary, Positive Energy finds several key ideas/recommendations for decision-makers grappling with energy and climate issues that emerge from the CLP experience:
1. Developing a plan requires expert consultation with government, energy companies, environmental organizations, and Indigenous peoples [Indigenous communities were unfortunately omitted under time pressure as coordination was needed with federal policy development];
2. Public consultation is also required, and
3. Creating a policy is not sufficient: an implementation plan, including communications, is necessary.
The case study on Alberta’s CLP is one of four case studies that Positive Energy has done, examining ‘What Works?’ when it comes to addressing polarized public policy situations. The other three deal with Canada’s Ecofiscal Commission, the Just Transition Task Force, and the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy.
Visit uottawa.ca/positive-energy/ for more.
— Summary by Stephen Kishewitsch