Global Resource Systems

After all the doom and gloom I presented in my previous few blogs, I figured its time to focus on some excitement. As this semester comes to an end, I am ecstatic to present my last blog of my third year as a small window into the excitement that lays ahead for me during the summer of 2014.

When confronted with some personal obstacles this year, I decided to make a leap into the unknown and sign up for a summer abroad, in no where more amazing than Pamplona, Spain. For the first 6 weeks of my summer in Europe I will have the amazing opportunity to partake in intensive spanish language courses while also studying the history of the European Union and economics and business markets with the EU. After my stay in the North West corner of the country,  I will continue my travels throughout the country to solidify my ability to speak the language (and maybe surf while doing so), and gain some first hand experience in a spanish culture.

My excitement for this trip has a few underlying reasons. The first is that I have recently decided to pursue my passion for energy policy. As I have said before in this blog, my interests have changed and will probably continue to change before I am through with my undergraduate degree. However, I am really excited about this idea! Part of being a part of international policy will entail me to learn a minimum of two new languages, and so I begin with Spanish! I write here for the record that I also plan to pursue French, and partake in the Canadian program explore in the coming year.

As I look ahead to my summer of excitement, I remember the exciting  developments that occurred over this past year that got me here. This semester was filled with amazing challenges, new experiences, and personal development. I am currently trying to get involved with an amazing emerging student run organization called Student Energy, and will hopefully be working with them in fall. Additionally I had the pleasure of working the lovely Sandra Brown, head of the sustainable soil program at UBC, throughout the term. I hope to continue to work with her in the next year, or with another inspiring professor in order to grow and advance my educational career.

Long story short, this semester was amazing in terms of me uncovering passions of mine I didn’t know I had. I guess all that left to say is Adios Vancouver! See you in the fall!

Oh. And one more thing. My final twelve days in Europe will be spent doing the Tour du Mont Blanc. If you click the link, you will understand the absolute bliss that those days will entail, and that it may be hard for me to come back for fall semester next year…

Until next year!

Olivia

The rise of concern over environmental impacts resulting from human developments came during the 1970’s, and was first seen in Canada in 1973. Growing concerns over the future impacts of various large scale projects prompted the expansion of the discipline of Environmental Impact Assessment. The EA process is integral in ensuring responsible and sustainable planning for development, and environmental protection (Glasson et al., 2013).

Following the Berger Inquiry of 1977 (an important part of Canadian environmental assessment history, when a pipeline proposal was rejected due to social and environmental impacts), Canada sought out to formalize its Environmental Assessment process. In 1995, Canada  put into legislation the process of Environment Assessment (EA) with the passing of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 1995 (CEAA 1995). CEAA 1995 provided the scope of projects that would be subject to an EA, a basic guide of what to include in the assessment, and other details to guide the policy tool. Public participation was encouraged, and there were over 40 responsible authorities in charge of carrying out these assessments across the federal jurisdiction.

When the global recession hit in 2008, Stephen Harper – Canada’s Conservative Party Premier – made a call for a focus in economic development nation wide. His push for development in energy sectors was apparent through the support of Alberta’s tar sands in the Athabasca region of the province. With the new push for development came push back from various groups of actors, and policies that had been put in place long before Harper was in office, in order to provide high environmental standards.

To address this issue, the Harper Government in 2012 passed in an omnibus budget bill (C-38) with a new Canadian Environment Assessment Act, CEAA 2012. This act included the following adjustments (Becklumb & Williams, 2012; Doelle, 2012):

• CEAA 2012 presented greater authority to provincial environmental assessment processes through the new addition of “equivalency.” Equivalency means all process and decision authority of the EA is transferred into the jurisdiction of the respective province.
• CEAA 2012 imposed a time limit for environmental assessments. Most assessments must now be completed in one year, while panel reviews have a two year limit.
• The responsibility of carrying out the assessments (responsible authorities) was reduced from over 40 to 3. This includes the National Energy Board (NEB), the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
• All responsibility of final approval was removed from the NEB and into cabinet.
• The scope of projects that must go through an EA process has significantly been reduced.
• CEAA 2012 redefined “environmental effect,” to a broader spectrum of impacts, making it harder to justify performing an EA in the first place.
• Lastly, but most importantly, CEA 2012 limited public participation to only those “directly affected” by the project or with relevant expertise.

CEAA 2012’s impacts will only be seen in their full reality in the coming years. With these changes come my concern that projects with significant impacts will not even be given a second thought, due to this new, lower level of protection that comes with CEAA 2012. My concern does not stand alone, as environmentalists across the country, including our own David Suzuki have spoken out in shock at these developments. A news clip gives evidence of this here. Already we have seen some of their effects here in BC. The hearings for the Kinder Morgan pipeline that will pass through Burnaby, BC has recently accepted or declined applicants to speak at the event. I know personally, that my policy Professor at the University of British Columbia was declined, on grounds of being not directly affected OR having relevant expertise (note that he has a Ph.D and specifically studies issues related to energy politics, and lives in Vancouver – the port where tanker traffic would increase due to the pipeline). The importance of policies and their ability to affect our province’s development will be quickly realized as economic development pressure continues and stakeholder conflicts surface.

References

Becklumb, P., & Williams, T. (2012). Canada’s New Federal Environmental Assessment Process. Issue brief.

Doelle, M. (2012). CEAA 2012: The End of Federal EA as We Know It?.

Glasson, J., Therivel, R., & Chadwick, A. (2013). Introduction to environmental impact assessment. Routledge.

Euphausia superba, otherwise known as Antarctic krill, are a small little crustacean that live in large schools, have thin transparents bodies, and may be associated with the animated hit “Happy Feet 2” which features Will the Krill. This semester, I learned two interesting things about krill. The first, is that krill have been presented as the potential solution to world food hunger, due to its high production rates and high sustainable yield (Nicol & Endo, 1999; Rufus, 2011; Fogleman, 1983). Second, krill are an integral part of their ecological system, and their absence would mean large scale dramatic effects for the Antarctic ecosystem (British Antarctic Survey, 2004; Butterworth & Thomson, 1995). In light of these two new pieces of knowledge, I have found there to be a conflicting argument.

Since the collapse of fisheries and various stocks of fish globally, much research has been poured into exploring how to recover these stocks, and also how to avoid this from happening to other aquatic species (Allison & Horemans, 2006; Berkes & Colding, 2000) . All the while that this is going on, world demand for food has and will continue to increase, and more mouths are needing to be fed. The concept of “feeding down the food web” was presented by academic researcher Daniel Pauly at UBC’s research facility. This concept acknowledged that as we exploit fish stocks of upper trophic levels, we consequently end up fishing lower and lower trophic levels (Pauly et al., 1998). Associated with this is research that has suggested that as you go down a trophic level, sustainable yields increase by a ten fold (Pauly et al., 2002). From this, it seems rational to suggest that we should begin to integrate krill into our diet directly (it is currently mainly used as fish food), and consequently begin solving issues of food shortages around the world.

However, at the same time that this idea has been brought to light, we have been seeing major impacts in the Antarctic as a result of global warming (Flores et al., 2012). As the ice melts, the krill are increasingly affected due to the fact that ice algae is their primary source of food. Take away ice, you take away krill. Take away krill, and you taken away, or radically transform, an entire ecosystem.

These two issues converge to make for an interesting conversation. Researchers may use tactics of ecosystem modelling and use of policy instruments such as Total Allowable Catch (TAC) to protect krill, while also increasing its importance in our food system. However, how accurate are we at making these predictions will largely determine the fate of krill and its surrounding ecosystem. Adding to this is the question of  how well will we be able to forecast ecosystem impacts on krill , if they become subject to pressures from not only climate change, but intensified fishing practices as well?

References

Allison, E. H., & Horemans, B. (2006). Putting the principles of the sustainable livelihoods approach into fisheriesdevelopment policy and practice. Marine policy, 30(6), 757-766.

Berkes, F., Folke, C., & Colding, J. (Eds.). (2000). Linking social and ecological systems: management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press.

British Antarctic Survey. (2004, November 4). Food Shortages Threaten Antarctic Wildlife. ScienceDaily. Retrieved April 22, 2014 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041104001422.htm

Butterworth, D. S., & Thomson, R. B. (1995). Possible effects of different levels of krill fishing on predators–some initial modelling attempts. CCAMLR science,2, 79-97.

Flores, H., Atkinson, A., Kawaguchi, S., Krafft, B. A., Milinevsky, G., Nicol, S., … & Werner, T. (2012). Impact of climate change on Antarctic krill.

Fogleman, V. M. (1983). Antarctic krill: problems and potential.

Nicol, S., & Endo, Y. (1999). Krill fisheries: development, management and ecosystem implications. Aquatic Living Resources, 12(02), 105-120.

Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R., & Torres, F. (1998). Fishing down marine food webs. Science, 279(5352), 860-863.

Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guénette, S., Pitcher, T. J., Sumaila, U. R., Walters, C. J., … & Zeller, D. (2002). Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature,418(6898), 689-695.

Rufus, A. (2011, December 16). Can Krill End World Hunger?. The Daily Beast. Retrieved April 22, 2014, from http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/12/16/can-krill-end-world-hunger.html

The country of Canada is noted to be home to 70-75% of the world’s mining companies. (Canadians for Tax Fairness, n.d; Wipond, 2013). Quebec researchers Alain Deneault and William Sacher set out to explore the question that had yet to be addressed here in Canada of why this may be true. In his 2010 book, Imperial Canada Inc, Deneault came to the conclusion that Canada successfully attracts so many multinational mining companies, due to its status as the top haven for transnational mining companies in the world.

Work in academia explain the tax havens through the idea of “international regimes.” Characterized as sets of principles, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures in which actors’ expectations come together in a given arena of international relations, international regimes are integral in increasing the probability of international player behaviour and providing a generalized set of rules (Eden & Kudrle, 2005). More specifically, “a tax regime exists to manage conflicts and interdependencies among nation states and multinational enterprises (MNEs)” and a renegade state is consequently a state who presents itself as an outlier from the practices specified of an international regime (Eden & Kudrle, 2005, p.100-101).

Because of Canada’s tax and governance characteristics surrounding the mining industry, it becomes an attractive home base for many mining companies around the world (details of Canada’s characteristics of what makes it a tax haven for mining can be explored in further detail in Deneault’s book, Imperial Canada Inc.). Literature expresses the recent outcry from  affected countries of Canadian mining expansion and its shocking lack of worker and operating rights, and its scarce acknowledgment of environmental concerns associated with the industry (Gordon & Webber, 2008; McMahon & Remy, 2001; Seck, 1999). It is true that mining companies from Canada have taken note of this, and have made it apparent in the public that they have taken the initiative to begin exploring sustainable mining practices in light of the issues being raised (Veiga et al., 2001; Dashwood, 2007).

This winter semester brought Alain Deneault to UBC for a brief talk about his book, Imperial Canada Inc., and the challenges we face today within the Canadian Mining Industry in relation to governance and tax havens. I have never been exposed to the idea of tax havens prior to Deneault’s talk, and when I began researching it more I was shocked to discover that anywhere from 60-80 different countries are considered tax havens for specific sectors.

This topic concerned me, as I saw Deneault talk as I was entering an era of passion for energy policy. If I have learnt anything this semester, it is that to attack large scale global issues, like climate change, we will be needing large scale global cooperation. Implementing forward thinking international policies will be undermined if renegade states, such as Canada, continue to create sanctuaries for multinational companies that later feed into undesirable corporate practice.

References: 

Canadians for Tax Fairness. (n.d.). Tax Havens and Mining Companies: The Canadian Connection. . Retrieved April 22, 2014, from http://www.taxfairness.ca/news/ottawa-book-launch-imperial-canada-inc-nov-8

Dashwood, H. S. (2007). Canadian mining companies and corporate social responsibility: Weighing the impact of global norms. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 40(01), 129-156.

Eden, L., & Kudrle, R. T. (2005). Tax Havens: Renegade States in the International Tax Regime?*. Law & Policy, 27(1), 100-127.

Gordon, T., & Webber, J. R. (2008). Imperialism and resistance: Canadian mining companies in Latin America. Third World Quarterly, 29(1), 63-87.

McMahon, G., & Remy, F. (Eds.). (2001). Large mines and the community: socioeconomic and environmental effects in Latin America, Canada, and Spain. Idrc.

Seck, S. L. (1999). Environmental harm in developing countries caused by subsidiaries of Canadian mining corporations: The interface of public and private International Law. Can. YB Int’l L., 37, 139.

Veiga, M. M., Scoble, M., & McAllister, M. L. (2001, August). Mining with communities. In Natural Resources Forum (Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 191-202). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Wipond, R. (2013, February 1). Canada Mining Races to the Bottom. Focus Online. Retrieved April 22, 2014, from http://www.focusonline.ca/?q=node/503

In the documentary, The End of the Line (available on NetFlix), viewers become exposed to the reality of our depleting global fish stocks, and experts’ predictions of what the future global fishery industry may look like if we continue along our current path. Through a few of my classes this semester, I was exposed to the state of our global fisheries, and how this resource that has been seen as renewable for so long, has in fact become un-renewable due to our techniques and management practices. The cod moratorium in Newfoundland, Canada can serve as an example for what happens when the mis-management of stocks spiral out of control when mixed with capitalist goals of ever expanding resource consumption. The history of cod in Newfoundland shows the importance that this industry had on culture, livelihood, and food security. The moratorium came into place in July of 1992, and was expected to only last 2 years to give the stocks time to recover. To this day, the stocks have never replenished back to sustainable levels. Fishing within the Newfoundland area is still highly monitored and regulated, with only few small scale fisheries allowed to operate. The full list of regulations can be found here.

An obstacle within our food production industries when addressing sustainable practices, is the transparency of operations from sea (or farm) to fork. An innovative organization called “ThisFish” works on doing exactly this, creating a clear picture of how our fish get to our plate. The process works by fishers, producers, manufactures, and transporters, having the medium to upload information on fish caught and tagging fish with codes. When consumers purchase fish in markets, they can then go online, type in their fish’s code, and discover details such as who it was who caught their fish, where it was caught, and when. You can explore the details of Thisfish on their website.

It is organizations like this that we need for all aspects of our food system. What makes it unreasonable to think that we could do this for everything we eat? Vegetables, meat, dairy, fruit, nuts, everything! We as consumers deserve to have the transparency and medium to access information on where it is our food is coming from. We can encourage this as consumers by buying from stores  that support initiatives such as ThisFish and OceanWise. Economics claim that it is the consumers that have the ultimate power in what products are supplied, and how they are produced. I challenge each of us to take responsibility for how our national and even global food production is currently operating, and begin to educate ourselves on who or what we are supporting, simply through the places where we shop for our food.

Canadian salmon, heading to spawning grounds

The Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) was created in BC in the year 1973, with the goals of protecting important, rich agricultural land from development pressures of the future. It is composed of 4.7 million hectares of BC’s land, and is governed by the province’s Agricultural Land Commission (ALC), which operates independent from provincial government. This land is comprised of some of the richest soils, that evolve only after millions of years – constituting them as a non-renewable resource.

In November of 2013, debates began about potential changes to the governance of the ALR, and the push to move the ALC to be a part of the Ministry of Agriculture would signify the end of its autonomy from centralized government. Government pressures are suggesting that modernizations of the ALR’s policies and protocols are needed to ensure economic expansion of the oil and gas industry, along with the call to make room for a growing population.

Opinions can be seen across articles that some of the ALR’s land is not suitable for strong agriculture production, and much of valuable developable land is locked in and untouchable due to ALC laws. Pushes for the ALC to be moved to a different jurisdiction has been argued to reflect the increasing focus of BC’s government on the natural oil and gas industry. Backlash in response to this includes points that the ALR accounts for a huge amount of land available for food production that would have otherwise been developed, and as previously discussed, includes important soil resources that are not easily recovered or discovered.

In my opinion, the ALR stands for the hope of food security within BC, and it is dangerous to move the decision making power to volatile government powers, usually with hidden agendas focused on GDP and voting strategies. Take for example, the Peace River Regional District. This area encompasses approximately 25% of the ALR, and 50% of BC’s food production. This area has been under discussion by government, and proposed to be sectioned off from the rest of the ALR, and governed by the governments Oil and Gas Commission. Further research indicates increased exploration in BC’s northern areas, and makes me wary of hidden motives and agendas, and lack of foresight to BC’s future food production.

My ending comment for this topic, is a call to local people to do our part. Educating ourselves from all angles on these topics is the first step in becoming a part of the conversation. The views I presented here is just a stepping stone to discovering all the different stakeholders present at the table of discussion. Once educated, it is our duty to make our opinions heard, and make change before irreversible damage has been done.

Sources:

http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Opinion+Farmland+abundant+need+protect/9247355/story.html

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Battle+heats+future+Agricultural+Land+Reserve/9173484/story.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/sacrosanct-agricultural-land-commission-eyed-for-breakup/article15306864/

http://prrd.bc.ca/services/emergency/oil_and_gas/index.php

http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/Mining/Geoscience/PublicationsCatalogue/OilGas/OGReports/Documents/2008/OG_Report2008-1.pdf

Gail Szostek, Environmental Technician of Maple Ridge, BC

After a fantastic summer spent in Tofino, BC, I returned to UBC this fall to begin the third year of my undergraduate  degree. I returned with a new found sense of calm after spending a summer in a place like this, enjoying the surf and the ease of a slower pace of life. I entered into my semester knowing I wanted to study water, but unsure of what sector of this resource to place my focus on.

Cox Bay, Tofino BC

Luckily for me, one of my classes this semester exposed me to problems within water governance, and water’s growing emergence as a scarce resource. I became inspired by leaders such as Maude Barlow, who advocates for water policy rights and issues in Canada, ensuring that we work hard to protect this important and ever decreasing resource. This video was one of the stepping stones to me changing direction and aiming to focus on water policy and governance throughout my degree.

I was fortunate enough this semester, with the support of the Faculty of Global Resource Systems, to be sent to Toronto to partake in the “Beyond Green Environment Summit” at the University of Toronto. Here, I was inspired by speakers such as Tzeporah Bernman, Majora Carter, and Tom Rand – all inspirational leaders within our global community. Through partaking in breakout sessions and informative panel reviews, I was also inspired by the strength of indigenous people – and realized by strong emotional tie to BC’s west coast.

I have been fortunate this semester to change directions, and begin exploring new opportunities that I hope to take advantage of while I finish my degree. I find myself constantly thankful for the support I receive from the GRS staff, and the flexibility of my degree. However, it is true that sometimes this flexibility feels like a curse! The next obstacles ahead for me lay in determining how to strengthen my degree, and discovering the routes that will lead me into the world of global water issues, where I hope to one day make a difference.

Bolivia, in December of 2010, passed a ten article law the first of its kind titled “Law of the Rights of Mother Earth.” The law speaks to seven major aspects of the environment that human communities and the earth itself are entitled to, including the right to diversity, clean air, and clean water. The interesting part of this law, I found, was the right to equilibrium. “It is the right to maintenance or restoration of the inter-relation, interdependence, ability to complement and functionality of the components of Mother Earth, in a balanced manner for the continuation of its cycles and the renewal of its vital processes.”

Overall, this law is working towards discouraging damaging and unsustainable practices. As seen in an article that you can read here, the law has been viewed as an attempt to increase food security, and discourage the privatization and monopolization of water and major food sources.

I can only imagine what a world would be like if Mother Earth was considered as having legal rights, and was considered in every decision that we make. Would we still be able to calculate GDP the same way? After all, we measure GDP purely off of our monetary system, and some may say that Mother Earth has no monetary value. It can not give us returns on our investments by just preserving a nature land space.

My question now is, must we reform our economic and political views before we can change our legal system in relation to the earth?

References:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_Rights_of_Mother_Earth
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/gallery/photo/bolivia-enacts-new-law-for-mother-earth-141899

Education systems around the world is a topic I find myself interested in and always compelled to read more on. Questions of what makes a good education system and how we can improve success rates of students are discussed in every country around the world, no matter their economic state.

What never ceases to fascinate me is the education system in Finland. Consistently in the past few decades, Finland has ranked top in the world for student graduation rates, college entrance numbers, and scores on international intelligence tests. In Finland, the education system is much different from the one we Canadians are used to. For example, students don’t start school until they are 7 and are not tested or assigned homework until the age 16. Teachers are held at much higher standards, needing a masters degree and must finish in the top 10% of their class to be considered for the position. (For more  facts about the Finish education system, click here.)

My thoughts have now turned to thinking about our education system, and what it says about how we operate in society. An article in the the tyee article suggests that we would never be able to adopt a Finnish sort of system because of our current view of school as a “competitive arena”. Economists may argue that competition is healthy, and encourages businesses and people to thrive.  So my questions is what would our society start to look like if we began reforming our education system? Would society begin to change its habits and views on life if we changed our education system? Would we care more about environmental problems? Would we encourage or discourage more innovation? Maybe changing our education system is the solution we’ve been looking for for many different problems in today’s world.

Ken Robinson discusses his view on how schools kill creativity in this ted talk.