Government Policy

Canadian government policy will prove key to the people of Northern Canada. Whilst the majority of governments are focusing on reducing their greenhouse gases, for the Canadian government something else needs to be done as just reducing emissions ‘is misplaced for northern Canadian residents’ (Newton et al, 2005).

Budreau and McBean (2006) argue strongly for the government to adopt a proactive approach as opposed to a reactive one. They liken climate change in Northern Canada to the collapse of cod fisheries in Atlantic Canada and say that many lessons can be learnt from this disaster. They say that the collapse of the cod fisheries did not come as a surprise and the government knew that fish stocks were on the decline. They argue that if the government had taken a proactive approach then they could have initiated schemes to relieve the effects of the collapse decades before it had occurred.

As well as this, McMahon (1996) suggests that the large amounts of spending after the collapse of the cod fishery hindered the economic growth which followed because it prevented innovation. This leads to the thought that maybe the government shouldn’t just throw money at the problem and could first of all see how adaptive the communities of the North could be.

The government need to plan in order to form policys which will build adaptive capacity in the North. Budreau and McBean (2006) again argue that the government need to start this as soon as possible, as cultural change is slow. They therefore suggest that a multi-faceted approach needs to be taken in order to build the adaptive capacity for impacts due to climate change. 

References (not online)

McMahon (1996) Looking the gift horse in the mouth: The impact of federal transfers on Atlantic

Canada, Bounty Press: Halifax