Interface between Alberta's environmental policies and the environmental management of three Albertan oil sends companies

Thesis (M.C.P.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning, 2009.Includes bibliographical references (p. 187-198).The Athabasca Oil Sands, located in northeastern Alberta, Canada, were for many years anomalous. Two oil sands operators developed their extraction techniques for 30 years, refining their technology before production became economically profitable. In the last 15 years as oil prices climbed, a tremendous amount of growth has occurred in the oil sands. Dozens of new projects are under construction or awaiting approval, creating one of the largest and most capital intensive mining operations in the world. Curiously there is a significant difference in environmental performance among three companies involved in open pit mining of the oil sands, Syncrude, Suncor Energy and Shell Canada's Muskeg River Mine. Suncor Energy is known for their reputation in stakeholder collaboration and reporting initiatives but has one of the most problematic environmental legacies. Meanwhile, Syncrude is seen as a relative leader in land reclamation but has taken the least action with regard to climate change. Shell Canada's Muskeg River Mine, draws from the resources of their parent company, Royal Dutch Shell, to proactively frame climate change management but has no public indicators of their land reclamation progress. What is the cause of this variation in environmental performance? Is it a result of difference corporate environmental governance strategies or of government policies? I suggest the variation of environmental performance is an organic response to the innate discretionary nature of environmental policymaking in Alberta, the lack of government leadership and the degree of initiative demonstrated by each company.(cont.) From my research it is clear that the inconsistent and at times vague government policy and regulations, opaque government agencies, poor monitoring and enforcement, inadequate incentives and penalties does not effectively encourage stronger environmental performance among oil sands developers. At the same time, internal corporate strategy, often in response to the recent pressure from environmental groups, First Nations communities and international media compels some companies to innovate and others to simply follow the regulations. Maintaining their social license, reducing costs, and anticipating future regulations have all been cited as motivation for innovation. Those advocating the status quo cite the exemplary regulatory framework already in place and the adequacy of existing stakeholder engagement processes; whereas corporate environmental leaders are frustrated by the uncertainty around environmental policies created by the provincial government. Ultimately the responsibility for the environmental management of the oil sands lies with the province. Companies can strive to innovate and compete with other developers, but they are not accountable for the management of cumulative effects in the region. If Alberta is going to improve the environmental performance of oil sands developers then a more transparent, credible and strategic environmental planning process must be created.(cont.) I conclude with three areas of policy improvements the Province can make to not only improve the environmental performance of the oil sands but also regain public trust in their role as manager of Alberta's natural resources: transparency, monitoring and enforcement, and responsible leadership.by Nathan C. Lemphers.M.C.P

Keeping it in the ground? Assessing global governance for fossil-fuel supply reduction

Restricting the international supply of fossil fuels is increasingly acknowledged as a necessary part of achieving long-term global temperature goals. However, the barriers to imposing such restrictions are immense. Issues of economic stability, equity, and associated geo-political tensions, are particularly acute. In theory, a managed decline can be facilitated by international cooperation. In practice, however, despite some apparent rhetorical commitments, adequate institutional responses have not been forthcoming. This paper highlights potentially relevant institutions, and assesses their combined contribution to fulfilling a set of governance functions relevant to decarbonisation in this case. The analysis finds that the governance challenges associated with deciding what fossil fuel carbon should be designated ‘unburnable’, and managing the associated equity-related, geo-political conflicts, are far from being fully recognised. Potential institutional reforms, by which governance gaps could be narrowed, are identified. These highlight the further potential of the G20, UNFCCC and WTO in particular

Beyond the Carbon Curse: a Study of the Governance Foundations of Climate Change Politics in Australia, Canada and Norway

Without risking hyperbole, climate change is the greatest political challenge humanity has ever faced. The world must achieve net-zero emissions by mid-century if the most catastrophic damage is to be avoided. The prospect of environmental transformation is most remote for major fossil fuel-exporting countries. Yet amongst the world’s largest exporters of carbon, three countries are more likely to make a transition: Australia, Canada and Norway. Across these three countries, significant climate policy variation exists. Norway developed an early, broad, diverse and durable suite of climate policies compared to Australia and Canada. In this dissertation, I explain the climate policy variation of these three countries and why responses from sympathetic governments were able to make headway and entrench policies in some cases but not others. A novel analytical framework is created to explain these outcomes using within-case process tracing and a comparative case study. Data is obtained largely through interviews with 124 informants and primary document analysis. My central finding is that the governance foundations of climate policy are critical in explaining climate policy. State strength matters. A strong and democratic state has the potential to assuage the political risk facing economic and regime elites from climate policy. It can restructure policy networks to empower civil society so that transformative climate policy is more likely to be announced and implemented. State strength can explain why switching governments in Australia and to some degree in Canada, as opposed to Norway, meant slow shifts and easy reversal. This dissertation contributes in several ways to the scholarship on comparative environmental politics and green state political theory. First, it foregrounds the role of the state in comparative environmental politics by emphasizing the unique and critical role that states play in providing the governance foundations needed to domestically decarbonize. Second, it theorizes linkages that can reconcile the green state literature with the economic growth imperative and the biogeochemical limits of the planet. Lastly, it provides theoretical insights into the transformative and democratic role of the strong state in addressing climate change by stressing inclusivity throughout the policymaking process.Ph.D

Beyond the Carbon Curse: a Study of the Governance Foundations of Climate Change Politics in Australia, Canada and Norway

Without risking hyperbole, climate change is the greatest political challenge humanity has ever faced. The world must achieve net-zero emissions by mid-century if the most catastrophic damage is to be avoided. The prospect of environmental transformation is most remote for major fossil fuel-exporting countries. Yet amongst the world’s largest exporters of carbon, three countries are more likely to make a transition: Australia, Canada and Norway. Across these three countries, significant climate policy variation exists. Norway developed an early, broad, diverse and durable suite of climate policies compared to Australia and Canada. In this dissertation, I explain the climate policy variation of these three countries and why responses from sympathetic governments were able to make headway and entrench policies in some cases but not others. A novel analytical framework is created to explain these outcomes using within-case process tracing and a comparative case study. Data is obtained largely through interviews with 124 informants and primary document analysis. My central finding is that the governance foundations of climate policy are critical in explaining climate policy. State strength matters. A strong and democratic state has the potential to assuage the political risk facing economic and regime elites from climate policy. It can restructure policy networks to empower civil society so that transformative climate policy is more likely to be announced and implemented. State strength can explain why switching governments in Australia and to some degree in Canada, as opposed to Norway, meant slow shifts and easy reversal. This dissertation contributes in several ways to the scholarship on comparative environmental politics and green state political theory. First, it foregrounds the role of the state in comparative environmental politics by emphasizing the unique and critical role that states play in providing the governance foundations needed to domestically decarbonize. Second, it theorizes linkages that can reconcile the green state literature with the economic growth imperative and the biogeochemical limits of the planet. Lastly, it provides theoretical insights into the transformative and democratic role of the strong state in addressing climate change by stressing inclusivity throughout the policymaking process.Ph.D

Where is the avoidance in the implementation of wetland

law and policy