Achieving climate, economic, and well-being objectives simultaneously is possible but requires substantial collaborative effort

Recommendation 1: Establish explicit cross-mandate accountabilities within government, by providing clear direction (e.g., in Ministers’ mandate letters) to consider integrated climate change, economic, and well-being objectives and by establishing formalized horizontal governance structures (such as a low-carbon growth committee).

Governments and researchers lack much of the data needed to measure clean growth progress

Recommendation 2: Better connect GHG data to economic data. Clean growth research and policy development requires easily accessible GHG data that matches GDP, employment, trade, and other data.

Governments and researchers lack much of the data needed to measure clean growth progress

Recommendation 3: Improve GHG data for Canada’s territories. Researchers need better data to include territories in comparative analyses with provinces.

Governments and researchers lack much of the data needed to measure clean growth progress

Recommendation 4: Collect more and better data on the costs of extreme weather events. The consistency and comprehensiveness of the Canadian Disaster Database should be improved.

Governments and researchers lack much of the data needed to measure clean growth progress

Recommendation 5: Broaden cleantech data to include more climate-relevant technologies. This should include economic activities that may not be purely “clean” but are consistent with low-carbon growth pathways. It should also include technologies that support adaptation and resilience to a changing climate.

Governments and researchers lack much of the data needed to measure clean growth progress

Recommendation 6: Tag public infrastructure investments for better tracking. We propose slotting climate related infrastructure investments into four categories: 1) low- or no-carbon, 2) low-carbon enabling, 3) resilient, and 4) natural.

Governments and researchers lack much of the data needed to measure clean growth progress

Recommendation 7: Develop more complete metrics of societal vulnerability to a changing climate. Vulnerability to a changing climate depends on multiple factors, including pre-existing sensitivities (such as poverty or underlying health conditions), exposure to climate impacts, and ability to adapt before and after climate events occur. Right now, few metrics fully capture all components.

Governments and researchers lack much of the data needed to measure clean growth progress

Recommendation 8: Improve data and reporting on ecosystem trends and related climate implications. Canada needs an organization with capacity comparable to the Canadian Forest Service for ecosystems such as wetlands and coastal and estuarine areas to coordinate improved measurement of carbon sinks and sources and undertake analysis on climate resilience benefits. The federal government should also work towards reporting more comprehensive GHG data on natural disturbances, such as wildfires and permafrost thaw, on unmanaged lands.

Several aspects of Canada’s clean growth progress have been slow or uneven

Recommendation 9: Use near-term investments to support a long-term clean growth transition. Governments can play a key role in overcoming barriers to private investment, particularly at a time when economies are struggling and capital is limited. Policies and investments made today can plant seeds that grow into long-term low-carbon and resilient economic growth.

Areas for Further Exploration by Governments and Researchers

Recommendation 10: Undertaking strategic clean growth assessments. Several governments in Canada require policy proposals to include a strategic environmental assessment. The federal government has also developed a climate lens for major public investments in infrastructure. It is worth exploring an expansion of these tools to explicitly incorporate a broader set of criteria linked to clean growth objectives. For example, while an infrastructure project would naturally consider general economic objectives, it might not consider low-carbon growth objectives. A low-carbon growth lens could lead to a greater emphasis on “enabling” infrastructure investments that support low-carbon technology development and adoption.