Transformative Energy Policy in Federal Systems

Transforming the energy system towards an increasing share of renewables requires a significant change of a policy to redirect the path-dependent evolution of a highly complex technical system. Moreover, a new path of development towards energy provision from renewables has to be stabilized to assure sustainability. The federal systems in Canada and Germany diverge in the institutional conditions relevant for policy change and stability. Canadian federalism separates powers in energy policy and allows the federal and provincial governments to change policies on their own. In contrast, German federalism requires co-operation between federal and Länder governments which favors policy stability but renders significant change unlikely. However, energy transformation started in the 1990s in Germany under conditions that allowed the federal government to avoid the usual mode of joint decision-making. In Canada, provincial governments took the lead in energy transformation, when the conservative federal government showed no interest in intergovernmental coordination. The article explains these shifts in power within the institutional framework. It also discusses the consequences, considering the stability of transformative energy policy. In Germany, policy change from the center undermined the stabilizing structures of intergovernmental coordination, in Canada, institutional conditions favoring continuity never existed. Hence in both countries, governments changed policies but failed to reform institutions of governance.

Environmental Issues in Recent British and Canadian Elections

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IN RECENT BRITISH AND CANADIAN ELECTIONS The 2019 elections in Britain and Canada illustrate the difficulties in communication between a concerned public and prospective office-holders on the most critical set of issues of our times. An increased level of public awareness and concern about the state of the environment has been expressed in public opinion polls, social movement activity has increased, and Green parties have expanded their appeal. Despite these developments in recent years, environmental issues have not been able to exert a major impact on individual voting behaviour in elections, or on overall election outcomes. Issues related to the environment are usually treated, by both politicians and the public, in valence terms. Valence issues are ones upon which there is broad consensus about the goals of public policy, and political debate focuses not on "what to accomplish" but rather on "how to do it" and "who is best able." Regarding the environment, general formulations like global warming and climate change prompt politicians to offer concerned rhetoric and engage in virtue signaling, but specific policy proposals are often absent. This paper examines four reasons why environmental/climate change issues did not have a major impact on the 2019 Canadian and British elections. First, environmental concern in society at large was imperfectly translated into election issues. Second, the major political parties produced inadequate and unconvincing environmental manifestos. Third, environmental issues were not central to most voting decisions. Fourth, environmental issues had limited impacts on election outcomes.

Climate and Energy Politics in Canada and Germany: Dealing with Fossil Fuel Legacies

Canada and Germany are both pursuing major energy transitions and far-reaching climate programs but differ in terms of policies towards some energy sources and their preferred policy instruments. Both countries have committed to large scale emission reductions despite the challenge of regional divestment from fossil fuels: hard coal in North Rhine Westphalia and the Saarland; lignite in the Rhineland, on the German-Polish border in the Lusatsia (Lausitz) region, and in central Germany; coal in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia; and oil in Western Canada. We contrast the current Pan Canadian framework (PCF) on Clean Growth and Climate Change to the German Climate Law and the European Green Deal setting targets to become climate neutral by 2050. Germany has plans for a dual phase out of nuclear energy by 2022 and coal by 2038. In contrast, Canada differs by province in terms of policies on fossil fuels and nuclear energy. Both are leaders in renewable energies, but differ in the type of renewable energy which dominates. We further examine the international action components of the PCF and its implications for collaboration with Germany and the EU. We discuss potential partnerships and strategic alliances between Canada and Germany in the context of their mutual interest to enable an energy transition and to lead to the implementation of the Paris agreement for climate change action. We identify political challenges within each federation, and especially the approach to impacted coal regions in Germany and Poland as well as the Canadian oil sands. Barriers to progress for meeting identified targets and timelines are considered. We conclude with insights on the possibility and likelihood of linking policies and regulatory measures across the Atlantic, and the political threats of advancing towards decarbonization and an energy transition away from fossil fuels in each jurisdiction.

Rising Subnational Greenhouse Gas Emissions: A Challenge to Meeting Federal Climate Policy

Policy makers in federated countries and the EU seeking to reduce total greenhouse gas emissions face a challenge when emissions are rising in some subnational jurisdictions. The magnitude of that challenge is influenced by the portion of total emissions represented by those jurisdictions, the rate of change in that portion, and the political power of those jurisdictions. This phenomenon is examined by a comparison of the role of rising-emission jurisdictions in the EU and Canada. We define a “rising-emission jurisdiction” as one in which emissions were higher in 2018 than in 1990, regardless of how its emissions may have risen or fallen between those dates. Those findings show that the role of rising-emission jurisdictions must be added to the factors identified in the literature explaining why between 1990 and 2018 EU emissions have declined by 25% while Canadian emissions have increased by 21%. To better understand this phenomenon and to help policy makers cope with it, more research is needed on its influence in other federated countries.

Climate Change Politics in Canada and the EU—from Carbon Democracy to a Green Deal?

The idea of a green deal transforming industrialized societies’ climate policies in a sustainable manner has become highly popular in various countries. The study takes up this notion focusing on climate policy initiatives in Canada and the EU, raising three interrelated issues: (i) on a descriptive level, the study asks where we stand and what has so far been achieved regarding climate policy; (ii) analytically, the study provides a theoretical explanation of why progress has been slow in the EU and hardly visible in Canada, making use of the concept of carbon democracy; (iii) on a prescriptive level, the study explores what will be needed to make a green deal successful, arguing that one has to accept that a green deal is a deeply political project that will create winners and losers and that not all losers can be compensated under the label of a “just transition”. The argument advanced is that the EU and Canada represent a form of carbon democracy in which the extensive use of carbon laid the foundation for establishing democratic institutions and strongly shaped them. The paper shows that the extensive influence of carbon-related activities not only empowers specific non-state agents but is rather deeply enmeshed in the societal and political genome of both regions’ polities. The claim that follows is that climate politics in Canada and the EU will have to be deeply transformative and therefore disruptive in order to be successful.

Elections in Canada and Russia in 2019: a comparative analysis of cross-national media coverage

In 2019, Canada and Russia went through election campaigns in their respective countries. While Canada voted at the federal level, Russia held regional and municipal elections, and therefore the scale and outcome of these two campaigns cannot be compared per se. Yet shifting a focus to media coverage, this paper explores Canada-Russia relations at a given moment in time, including the extent to which disinformation took place on either side. The two countries were actively involved in cross-commenting about the situation on the ground. Russian English-language media outlets were visibly more anti-Trudeau in nature in their Canadian election coverage, while Canadian authorities called on their Russiancounterparts to respect freedoms of assembly during pre-election opposition rallies in Moscow. However, in a modern highly interconnected world, where should the border between news reporting/tweeting and an attempt to interfere in elections be located; and how do these efforts advance each country’s interests?

Offensive Weapons and the Future of Arms Control

With a focus on the strategic competition between the United States and Russia, this paper explores the prospects for the future of arms control under an intensifying nuclear security dilemma. The end of stability-enhancing agreements such as the INF Treaty and Open Skies has accelerated the arms race. What is the future of New START and are we likely to see any extension beyond 2021? The relationship between arms control and strategic stability is part of this evaluation, particularly with respect to how states view the concept framed within their national security interests. The provocative role that offensive – deterrence by denial – capabilities play in contributing to strategic instability is central to this study. This work looks particularly at new systems designed for asymmetric advantage, including those that can defeat strategic defences, such as longer-range cruise missiles and hypersonic vehicles. Under conditions of modernizations and upgrades to nuclear arsenals, including the entanglement of conventional and nuclear systems that can threaten a first strike, this work considers how a dialogue on limiting dangerous systems could be initiated between the US and Russia. Could New START be revised – or a new treaty established – to limit advances in cruise missile technology, hypersonics, missile defences, and tactical nuclear weapons?

Russia-Canada Relations in the Period of Crisis, 2014-20

This article explores the state of Russia-Canada relations 2014-2020, and identifies areas where cooperation is possible. The bilateral relations are deeply affected by the overall crisis in Russia-West relations, and are at the lowest point since the end of the Cold war. The war of sanctions and accusatory rhetoric by officials from the both sides have come to the forefront. However a “niche cooperation” between Russia and Canada is possible in the areas where both sides can find common interests. Cooperation on non-political issues, using instruments of alternatives diplomacies: track-2 diplomacy, paradiplomacy, business diplomacy and parliamentary diplomacy, are all viable approaches, and provide the potential for a positive experience of interaction in the period of crisis. One of the most promising dimensions of Russia-Canada cooperation is interaction in the Arctic region in bilateral and multilateral frameworks.

Western Hegemony and Russia’s Eurasian Turn

According to some perspectives, it is difficult to imagine the collective West developing further relations with Russia beyond the regulatory and systemic – rather than the social – so long as their political systems remain divergent. At the same time, continued elements of Russian “Europeanness” raise fundamental questions about the future role and pre-eminence of liberal states – including Canada – in the contemporary international order, seeing as the Western-led liberal order appears to have failed to become synonymous with global order itself. As such, Russia remains a good case study for probing the extent to which a future world order must root itself in a monist frame in today's pluralistic world. This paper will seek to explore this question from a perspective rooted in the English School of international relations, with the aim of deriving conclusions regarding the liberal international order's ability to maintain its hegemonic position in global international society.