Controversy is common on environmental issues, with carbon taxation in Canada a current example. This paper uses Canada as a case study for analysis based around balanced presentation, a technique developed some time ago, yet largely forgotten. Using the method, analysis is shifted away from the point of controversy to a broader quantitative question, with comparative data employed from official government sources. Simple quantitative analysis is applied to evaluate emission trends of individual Canadian provinces, with quantitative metrics to identify and confirm the application of relevant emission reduction policies by individual jurisdictions. From 2005 through 2019, three provinces show consistent downward emission trends, two show consistent upward trends, and the remaining five have no trends, showing relatively “flat” profiles. The results clarify, in terms of diverse emission reduction policies, where successes have occurred, and where deficiencies or ambiguities have existed. Neither carbon taxation nor related cap-and-trade show any association with long-term reductions in overall emissions. One policy does stand out as being associated with long-term reductions, namely grid decarbonization. The results suggest a possible need within Canada to rethink emission reduction policies. The method may be relevant as a model for other countries to consider as well.
Canada as a Case Study for Balanced Presentation to Address Controversy on Emission Reduction Policies