Contemporary Canadian Climate Policy and the Failure of Liberal Environmentalism

Written by: Liad Wolch

Edited by: Louis Chenot

On 11 September 2025, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that the newly established Major Projects Office would be fast-tracking regulatory assessments and approvals for, as well as assisting in the financing of five “nation-building projects,” the first of which will be LNG Canada Phase Two, a project aiming to double Canada’s liquified natural gas production (Prime Minister of Canada, 2025). At first glance, the Prime Minister’s support for LNG, and potentially an oil pipeline with carbon capture and storage (CCS), seems to contradict his policy stance as UN Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, where Carney stated in an interview that “[Companies] who are lagging behind and are still part of the problem will be punished” for failing to reduce emissions (United Nations, 2021). 

Liberal Environmentalism: A Framework for Interpreting Carney’s Climate Platform

However, the Prime Minister’s positioning on the energy transition becomes clearer when placed within the norm-complex of liberal environmentalism. This school of thought emphasises the use of free market solutions to address environmental crises (Bernstein, 465, 2000). Bernstein summarizes the policy positions of liberal environmentalism in this way: 

“Liberal environmentalism supports liberalization in trade and finance as consistent with (even necessary for) global environmental protection. It promotes sustained economic growth, free trade, privatization of the commons and the use of market-based or other economic mechanisms (for example, tradable pollution permits, cost benefit analysis) as the preferred means of environmental management.” (Bernstein, 2000, p. 474)

As UN Special Envoy on Climate Actions and Finance, Carney institutionalized liberal environmentalist norms globally through the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net-Zero – an organization focused “on developing the building blocks for a financial system capable of financing the transition to net zero.” While more than 160 financial organizations signed on to the alliance at COP 26, the group’s efficacy has been challenged by the election of US president Donald Trump in November 2024. Canada’s “Big Five” banks left the group in January 2025, along with many European and American financial institutions. In August, the group temporarily suspended its operations to debate how it will realign with “a new framework initiative” (“Green Banking Alliance”, 2025).

Liberal Environmentalism: System (Transition) Failure

On 18 September 2025, the Canadian Climate Institute – an arm’s length climate policy research organization – released a statement announcing that given recent stalling of emissions reductions, Canada will no longer be able to meet its 2030 emissions reduction target of a 40-45 percent reduction compared to 2005 levels. While emissions from the transportation, building, heavy industry, and electricity industries all declined in 2024, oil and gas industry emissions increased 1.9 percent year-on-year, primarily due to oil sands emissions. Furthermore, the oil and gas sector accounted for 31 percent of national emissions during the year, roughly equivalent to 215 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (Sawyer and Siebery 2025). 

Given this context, it appears that a systemic transformation of Canada’s economy and energy network towards sustainable decarbonization is required in order to restore progress to net-zero targets. Unfortunately, liberal environmentalism appears unlikely to be capable of enacting this shift. In her book A just transition for all: workers and communities for a carbon-free future, climate and environmental justice scholar J. Mijn Cha (2024) argues that in order for an energy transition to truly be a transition, it must be one which moves away from fossil-fuel-dependent energy systems rather than one which simply moves across a fossil-dependent system. Furthermore, in order for such a transition to be just, it must address the underlying economic system, one which is presently predicated on extraction, and shift towards a regenerative economic model (p. 27). 

Liberal environmentalism fails on both fronts. First, systemic transition is undermined by allowing markets to dictate environmental policy. Look no further than the CEO of the Major Projects Office, Dawn Farrel, who currently chairs the Trans Mountain Corporation’s board of directors and was the company’s former CEO (“Trans Mountain Board Chair”, 2025). The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, the oil and gas industry’s largest lobby, praised Farrel’s appointment, shining a light on the revolving door between industry and the public sector. In an article with Narwhal journalist Carl Meyer, Greenpeace Canada energy strategist Keith Stewart, described the industry lobby in these terms: 

“Canadian oil lobbyists have been remarkably, and appallingly, consistent in demanding that the government of Canada follow Donald Trump’s lead and eliminate federal climate policy in favour of boosting fossil fuels” (Meyer, 2025). 

Given that industry sits at the helm of policymaking under the liberal environmentalist paradigm, it appears unlikely that a systemic shift away from fossil fuel energy will occur through a market-based approach.

Shifting Norms: Earth Systems Governance

Bierman (2022) offers Earth System Governance (ESG) as an alternative framework to liberal environmentalism. ESG focuses on socio-ecological systems as necessarily interdependent, and attempts to address the “human impact on planetary systems” in a way that promotes stability and mutual flourishing of all species (p. 285). When considering global environmental politics, Biermann argues that:

“Politically, framing major earth system transformations such as climate change as merely “environmental problems” – to be dealt with by second-tier environmental ministries and agencies – might even have harmed their standing in the policy system and politically marginalized central planetary concerns, which new discourses, such as calls for “climate emergencies,” now seek to revert.” (p. 284)

Liberal environmentalism establishes artificial boundaries around what counts as an environmental issue and what does not, sidelining environmental policy and deepening carbon lock-in, a phenomenon outlined by Bernstein and Hoffman (2019) where systemic decarbonization is hampered due to “overlapping political, economic, technological and cultural forces that reinforce fossil energy use” (p. 919). To continue supporting fossil fuel-intensive industry, as Carney is doing now, is to remain trapped in carbon lock-in, undermining medium- and long-term prospects for carbon drawdown.

But is it Just?

In addition to failing to systemically decarbonize energy, liberal environmentalism reinforces extractive economic systems and inequitable energy governance which, when combined, burden communities with the damages of environmental crises while depriving them of profits from their resources. LNG Canada Phase Two, for instance, received approval despite failing to obtain consent from many of the First Nations consulted in the government’s environmental assessment. One group, the Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs, were excluded from consultations entirely despite concerns of water contamination due to their territory being downstream of the facility. 

Indigenous peoples have also been tokenized during the nation-building projects process. Trevor Mercredi, Grand Chief of the Treaty 8 First Nations of Alberta, is listed as a member of the Indigenous Advisory Committee established to support the MPO. Mercredi, however, highlighted that fast-tracking legislation in the manner that the MPO has been mandated to do will inevitably lead to Indigenous legal opposition (The Canadian Press, 2025).

Liberal environmentalism was a normative success internationally, as it enabled states to incorporate environmental protection into a growth-oriented economic framework. However, as Cha (2024) notes, in order for an energy transition to be just, it must “address [the] systemic and institutional” relationships which perpetuate inequalities, “regardless of energy source” (p. 45). Liberal environmentalism fails to do so.

Biojustice Environmentalism and the Leap Manifesto

Since liberal environmentalism appears unable to enact a timely and just decarbonization process, what alternatives are available to make such a process possible? One option is biojustice environmentalism, a movement complementary to earth systems governance. Biojustice environmentalism has four aims (Clapp and Dauvergne, 2023, pp. 7-8): 

• To resist racism, colonialism, neoliberalism, and capitalism, all of which are central to inequality and environmental degradation.

• To reject market-liberal solutions to environmental crises, which serve only to delay action or exacerbate damages.

• To enact wholesale political and economic reforms which provide communities decision-making authority.

• To recentre justice and equity, particularly for marginalized communities, within socio-ecological governance.

Political potential for realizing biojustice environmentalism at the national level exists in Canada today. In the lead-up to the 2015 Canadian federal election, climate activists Naiomi Klein and Avi Lewis created the Leap Manifesto, a document outlining various policy positions aimed at enabling a just transition to decarbonization in Canada. The document received 53,606 signatures, including from the Student Society of McGill University, the McGill Office of Religious and Spiritual Life, and Divest McGill (The Leap Manifesto). The Leap Manifesto offers a pragmatic and actionable platform on which to achieve biojustice environmentalism. Serendipitously, Lewis recently announced his bid for federal leadership of the NDP on 19 September 2025. As leader, he would have the opportunity to tap into growing opposition to Carney’s policy platform, as evidenced by the cross-country protests on 20 September 2025 organized under the slogan “Draw the Line.” A biojustice environmentalism framework has the potential to revive the federal NDP by recommitting Canada to its climate goals as well as address growing economic inequality across the country.

Conclusion

Liberal environmentalism helps explain why Carney, a vocal international climate figure, has been unable to make systemic carbon drawdown a reality: by relying on markets to lead the transition, the prime minister enables the fossil fuel industry to entrench carbon lock-in, slowing action on decarbonization and undermining democratic accountability in the energy system. To enact a just transition at speed and scale, politicians must refocus on earth systems governance. Importantly, this lens acknowledges how ecological systems are necessarily interdependent with socio-economic systems. Furthermore, politicians can look to movements such as biojustice environmentalism, and their proponents across the country, who offer a vision of sustainable and democratic energy production while relieving both the social and ecological burdens born by marginalized communities.

References

Bernstein, S. (2000). Ideas, Social Structure and the Compromise of Liberal Environmentalism. European Journal of International Relations, 6(4), 464–512. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066100006004002

Bernstein, S., & Hoffmann, M. (2019). Climate politics, metaphors and the fractal carbon trap. Nature Climate Change, 9(12), 919–925. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0618-2

Biermann, Frank. (2022). “21. Earth System Governance: World Politics in the Post-Environmental Age.” In Routledge Handbook of Global Environmental Politics, 2nd ed. Routledge. 283–294. Access: https://proxy.library.mcgill.ca/login?url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781003008873-25/earth-system-governance-frank-biermann?context=ubx&refId=465cdb2b-cb2e-456b-afab-98b414b835a9

CCI. (2022 May). Electric Federalism: Policy for Aligning Canadian Electricity systems with Net-Zero. Canada Climate Institute. https://climateinstitute.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Electric-Federalism-May-4-2022.pdf

Cha, J. M. (2024). A just transition for all : workers and communities for a carbon-free future. The MIT Press. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=3839352

Clapp, J., & Dauvergne, P. (2023). Surging Biojustice Environmentalism from Below: Hope for Ending the Earth System Emergency? Global Environmental Politics, 23(4), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00712

GFANZ. Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net-Zero. GFANZ. https://www.gfanzero.com/

Meyer, Carl. (2025, August 27). “Carney touted oil and gas ‘partnerships.’ CEOs wanted to talk Trudeau’s climate plan”. The Narwhal. https://thenarwhal.ca/carney-climate-plan-oil-lobbying/

Office of the Prime Minister of Canada. (2025, September 11) Prime Minister Carney announces first projects to be reviewed by the new Major Projects Office. Prime Minister of Canada. https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/news-releases/2025/09/11/prime-minister-carney-announces-first-projects-be-reviewed-new

Statistics Canada. Table 25-10-0065-01  Oil and gas extraction revenues, expenses and balance sheet (x 1,000,000)

The Canadian Press. (2025, June 19). “Carney’s Contentious Major Projects Bill Clears Committee”. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/major-projects-bill-passes-clears-committee-1.7565285

UNCC. (2021, January) Mark Carney: Investing in net-zero climate solutions creates value and rewards. United Nations Climate Change. https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/mark-carney-investing-net-zero-climate-solutions-creates-value-and-rewards

Zimonjic, Peter. (2025, August 28). “Green banking alliance Carney helped create pauses activities, holds vote on its future”. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carney-nzba-suspends-activities-holds-vote-1.7619977

Zimonjic, Peter. (2025, August 29). “Trans Mountain board chair to lead new federal Major Projects Office based in Calgary”. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/major-projects-office-carney-1.7620935