We are all rather familiar with the story of colonization. Christopher Columbus and his boat of merry men landed on the shores of Eastern Northern America, and well, the rest is history. In its truest roots, Canada has been in the spot light with balancing the power of the established Federal Government and that of the vast First Nations peoples that inhabit the land.

In Canada there are two varieties of land rights: Crown Land and Indigenous Land (traditional, ancestral, unceded territory). For example, UBC is situated on borrowed land from the Musqueam People, and we were officially granted permission to use the Thunderbird by the Kwicksutaineuk people of the B.C. west coast. Nevertheless, in countless occasions in Canadian History, there has been an ongoing debate and struggle for proper entitlement to the land and its wealth. Canada is a very prosperous nation with copious natural resources: minerals, water, lumber, etc. When the Federal Government looks to exploit these resources in order to help prosper the Canadian Economy, it often comes at the cost of moving onto Indigenous Land.

On January 27th, 2017 the First Nations of Vancouver Island placed a ban on industrial logging and mining operations, in the name of sustainability. “80% of almost 171,000 hectares will be set aside as cultural and natural area”. This is spirited in the quest to conserve the massive and rich area from inevitable ecological destruction.

Hadley Archer, Natural Conservancy Executive Director, described how this ban on industrial practices is at the pure foundations of the triple bottom line of sustainability: where social, environmental and economic significance are taken into account for the sustainable future of their globally significant ecosystems.

Upon deeper analysis, it is evident that the First Nation Council is actively taking steps in the right direction, in effort to keep their rightful land intact and by making effective use of its natural abilities. The Band has been overly concerned with the logging of old-growth forests, as well as salmon farming in the area. The Ahousaht people are presenting plans to help diversify the community’s activities by developing light infrastructure to support run-off-river hydroelectricity, tourism and lumber harvesting.

This is a powerful story of resilience and sustainability, where the people still proudly stand for the values where they can continue to prosper as an independent people, while preserving the very land upon which their ancestors lived.

It is the unfailing optimism that eluded us,

where a swift ocean breeze may sail us away to were all hope may be lost.

But it is the orgiastic purpose that keeps us searching:

to find a tool, learn a fix and travel on a corrected course …

all to save a body of water worth fighting for.

The changing face of our very environment is at the hands of every human interaction: leisure, work, transactions, etc. To combat the negative effects of climate change, more often than not, we turn to our leaders to inspire policy action, guidance, and ultimately the ability to make the necessary changes.

The political landscape of North America is changing at every turn. In recent years, we have seen significant change in power and national values: Harper -> Trudeau, Obama -> Trump. These are drastic shifts not only in leadership, but also in political platforms and preferences on federal spending. Media has intensely covered Trump’s selection of his of cabinet secretaries, notably Scot Pruitt, an active climate change denier, as Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This is a shift from Obama’s EPA Administrator, Gina McCarthy, who held a long tenure in the organization and was referred to as ‘the President’s serious push’ to address climate change. There is an opposing shift within our own country, where Prime Minister Trudeau confirmed his Minister of Environment, Catherine McKenna, who is steamrolling Canada in the direction of cleaner forms of fuel and energy, replacing Harper’s Leona Aglukkaq who on numerous occasions was absent from international climate change discussions; notably The Climate Summit of the Americas in 2015. Seems to be evident that as Canada takes a step in one direction, the US may be heading in the other. What are the possible implications of the future of the environment and relations with the US?

When referring to the article, Creating Shared Value, Porter and Kramer address the directed role that governments play in regulating ways to enable shared value, not resisting against it. There is a correlation to the possible development of clusters and communities to enhance the triple bottom line of sustainability (social, environmental, financial). Nevertheless, there are barriers to scale that are only conquered in collaboration with governments and within the society. If our elected governments and policy officials refuse to establish the necessary programs within these communities, there are potential threats that can prohibit inclusive business.

Successful strategies that strive for shared value with progressive relationships with government have expanded economic opportunities and preserved integral environmental concerns.

With the power, and arguably duty, that governments have in respect to environmental protection and good business, the implications of the next 4 years of governance could influence our next ‘X’ on the ballot.