Canada at the WSSD Sustainable Development: A Canadian Perspective

« Previous Page | Table of Contents | Next Page »

11 CONCLUSION

As a peaceful, prosperous country with a large landbase, Canadians are better able than most to make the investments required to enhance the sustainability of their lifestyles. During the last decade, they have achieved much: they are wealthier, use energy and resources more efficiently, have improved their governments’ finances, emit fewer toxic chemicals into the environment, protect more landscapes, manage forests more sustainably and have achieved one of the world’s highest standard of living as calculated by the UN’s Human Development Index. Internationally, Canada has played a leading role in peacekeeping and in developing important international agreements (such as Persistent Organic Pollutants and Straddling Fish Stocks). In addition, it has forgiven the debt of several very poor countries.

In spite of these achievements Canada continues to face challenges related to all aspects of sustainable development. Among the continuing challenges are the needs to reduce pollution, preserve ecological integrity of natural capital, and reduce urban encroachment onto surrounding lands. Disparities remain in equity among social groups, among regions and between genders, although gaps have been reduced. The situation of Aboriginal people is of particular concern.

On the positive side, efforts are ongoing to ensure that international trade agreements integrate the needs of developing countries and environmental, labour, and broad social considerations. However, Canada’s contribution to foreign aid has diminished even as the standard of living of Canadians has improved.

While Canadian governments at all levels, Aboriginal people, labour, many corporations, communities and NGOs have implemented a large number of initiatives that should produce positive impacts in the years ahead, many of these actions will not make their mark for some time to come. For example, it will take time before reductions in emissions of some toxic substances translate into decreases in soil, water or country food concentrations; or for changes in silviculture to be noticed in ecosystem health; or for a healthier environment to have a noticeable effect on the health of Canadians.

The lag-time between action and result is particularly evident in the many changes in decision-making processes and management practices that governments and civil society have initiated. While these changes are essential, the impact of implementing strategic environmental assessment in a government, or an environmental management system in a company, for example, will not be felt fully for years. To a large extent, it is therefore premature to assess their impact at this stage.

Another reason why it is difficult to evaluate the impact of measures taken is that the information required to do so is often unavailable. During the 1990s, Canada made a major investment to improve the development and dissemination of health data. In the environmental area, a Canadian Information System for the Environment is at the beginning stages and it will take years before the needed investments in information gathering and analysis yield more up-to- date knowledge of Canada’s state of the environment. The problem is different in the social area where detailed data exist but a conceptual framework to measure social sustainability is still missing.

Despite the limitations imposed by incomplete and inconsistent data and the lack of agreed upon performance metrics, it can be concluded that Canada’s overall sustainable development performance is consistent with that of most of its industrialized peers: its standard of living, its ecological footprint, the longevity and educational attainment of its inhabitants are all broadly comparable to those of G7 countries.

While it is hard to answer in detail how well Canada is doing in its progress toward more sustainable forms of development, the much more difficult – and equally important – question is: Is Canada doing well enough? That question cannot be answered here, although it is hoped that this report provides some of the information and the range of perspectives required to begin to address this fundamental question.

« Previous Page | Table of Contents | Next Page »