Creating a Sustainable, Resilient, Low Carbon Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Region

A Process to Develop a Shared Vision and Blueprint

DRAFT DISCUSSION PAPER

SEPTEMBER 2017

Contents

1.0 Purpose 31.1 Purpose and Stakeholder Input 31.2 Desired Outcomes 41.3 Why is a vision and lueprint needed? 41.4 Proposed Principles for Building a Common Vision and Blueprint 5

2.0 The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region in 2030 62.1 Respect and Recognition of First Nations and Metis peoples of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region 62.2 Protecting the Region’s Ecosystem Health 72.3 Adaptive and Resilient Communities 122.4 Transitioning to a sustainable, low carbon platform and strengthening the region’s competitiveness in the ‘smart’ economy 13

3.0 A Process to Develop the Vision and Blueprint 213.1 Objectives 213.2 Learning from the U.S. Great Lakes Regional Collaboration 213.3 Process to Develop a Shared Vision and Blueprint 243.4 Timing and Draft Budget 273.5 Resourcing the Blueprint Process and Implementation 28

4.0 Discussion Questions 284.1 Value and Outcomes of Collaborative Process 294.2 Stakeholder Engagement 294.3 Proposed Principles 294.4 Painting a Picture of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region in 2030 294.5 Process and Implementation 29

2

1.0 Purpose

1.1 Purpose and Stakeholder Input

This Discussion Paper has been prepared to engage key stakeholders in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region. It challenges interested parties to envision the Region in 2030 as a global leader in the protection of fresh water, building adaptive and resilient communities, and pursuing a sustainable, low carbon economy. It proposes an 18-month inclusive, consultative process to arrive at this shared vision and to develop a blueprint with specific recommendations on how to get us there, through strategic investments, enhanced programming and integrated activities at all levels of government, in business and communities.

The concept of such a collaborative process is a product of deliberations amongst groups with a shared interest in the future sustainability and prosperity of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region. The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, the Council of the Great Lakes Region, the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Freshwater Future, and Strategies Saint Laurent , now called the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Collaborative (The Collaborative) were inspired by the success of the US Great Lakes Restoration Initiative that resulted in unprecedented local activity to protect and restore the Great Lakes, financed by billions of dollars in federal funding. The Collaborative committed to working together and to invite other groups to join them to inspire similar levels of interest and investment in the Canadian side of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region.

To reflect the needs and interests of those who live and work in the Region, it is essential that the process to arrive at a shared vision and blueprint is highly collaborative and inclusive, drawing on the experience and knowledge of a range of concerned stakeholders.

Stakeholders will be involved throughout the process in defining priorities and making recommendations on needed investments and programming. As a starting point, the Collaborative asks your organisation to get involved at this very first stage, to provide input and reach agreement on the process and key issues to be addressed.

This document sets the stage for this first phase of engagement with a broader range of stakeholders who share the Collaborative’s interest in the future of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region. The document is organized into four parts. ● Part I explains the purpose and desired outcomes of the Collaborative, as well as

proposed key principles on which to build a common vision and blueprint; ● Part II provides a scan of environmental and economic trends in the region to

help envision the Region in 2030;● Part III provides an overview of the US GLRI process, proposes a parallel

Canadian process to follow and the necessary budget and resources needed to undertake a GLSL Collaborative process.  

● Part IV poses key questions for stakeholder discussion and feedback.

3

In addition to feedback on this document, the Collaborative has also partnered with the de Gaspé Beaubien Foundation and Mitacs to undertake a scan of stakeholder issues related to the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence. Your organisation may be contacted by Mitacs to complete a survey or participate in a telephone interview on your views on Great Lakes St. Lawrence issues.

The Collaborative proposal is only as strong as the stakeholders that support it and provide input. We welcome your organization’s feedback to the key questions in Section IV and thank you in advance for your participation. Please send your comments to Andrea Paine at andrea.paine@glslcities.org. This document will be revised based on your feedback and information gathered by MITACs and presented to Federal, Provincial and Indigenous leaders later this fall.

1.2 Desired Outcomes

It is expected that the process outlined in Part III of this document will take up to eighteen months to complete. At the end of this process, the Collaborative has three desired outcomes.

Firstly, we want to have completed a successful, inclusive, collaborative process, with the endorsement and financial support of the Federal Government of Canada, that generates a consensus vision and blueprint for the Great Lakes St. Lawrence region.

Secondly, the blueprint will have specific, practical recommendations on investments, programs and actions by all levels of government and business and civil society stakeholders to reach the shared vision for the Region in 2030.

Third and finally, the Collaborative will seek Federal, Provincial, Municipal and First Nation/Metis government endorsement of the vision, and a commitment from the Federal Government and other levels of government to implement the blueprint with sufficient funding and within the timelines set out in the blueprint.

1.3 Why is a vision and lueprint needed?

By any measure, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region is an environmental and economic powerhouse. The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River are a vital economic, ecological and community resource. Containing 20% of the Earth’s surface freshwater, the Great Lakes contain 3 of the 5 largest lakes in the world (Lake Superior, Lake Huron and Lake Michigan). Together with the mighty St. Lawrence River, these bodies of water provide drinking water to 40 million in the U.S. and Canada. The region’s wetlands, forests and prairies, provide critical habitat to more than 3,500 species of plants and animals, and are home to beautiful beaches and world class fishing opportunities that draw thousands of visitors to their waters every year.

For thousands of years, First Nations people have depended on this ecosystem for food, navigation and cultural identity. More recently, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region has grown to be home to 107 million Canadians and Americans living in two

4

provinces (Ontario and Quebec) and eight states (New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota). With an economy valued at CDN$7.6trillion (USD$5.8 trillion) in 2015, the region is vital to the competitiveness and future prosperity of Canada and the U.S., supporting some 55 million jobs or nearly 30% of the combined Canadian and U.S. workforce and contributing roughly half of the total value of goods traded across the border each year. If the Region were a country, it would be third largest economy in the world.

While this growth has created unprecedented prosperity, it has also strained this inland water ecosystem. Forces, local to global, pose new and persistent challenges to sustaining this vital ecosystem and ensuring a vibrant and thriving Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region. Despite years of effort and progress under an array of bi-national and federal-provincial agreements, increasing nutrient loads, an influx of invasive species, new discharges of toxic pollution, and continuing stresses on habitat continually threaten public health, drinking water, and ecosystem vitality.

Looming large over these challenges is the global threat posed by climate change. The climate of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region is already experiencing heat waves, prolonged droughts, shorter winters, and more intense and extreme storms and snow melts. This new normal will require increased resiliency in our communities, and adaptability in our climate and water dependent industries like energy, agriculture, and tourism.

Progress is being made in the fight against climate change. Both Ontario and Quebec have reduced their dependence on carbon-based energy, and have joined Cap and Trade programs to drive carbon emission reductions and generate funding for further actions. While they have made good progress in reducing existing emissions, much greater effort is needed to ensure our leading economic sectors, agriculture, auto manufacturing and aerospace to name a few, are not left behind in developing and marketing the low-carbon technologies and design that will shape the global economy in the second half of this century.

Addressing these challenges and seizing these opportunities will require a future-focused blueprint that integrates economy, environment and communities under a common vision of a region based on sustainability, resiliency, and low carbon growth. Without a plan to coordinate the investments and actions of the many players across the region, we risk further compromising the ecosystem that millions of people depend on for their health, livelihoods and leisure every day. And we risk missing the opportunity to position the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River region as a world leader in creating sustainable jobs and low-carbon economic growth for the 21st century and beyond.

1.4 Proposed Principles for Building a Common Vision and Blueprint

This Collaborative is about developing a vision for the region in 2030 and blueprint, an actionable plan, to get us there.

5

To help visualize what this future may bring us, some of the trends that are shaping the region are outlined in section 2, below. This process is not starting from scratch. As the scan below demonstrates, there is a tremendous amount of good work being done at the regional level on which we can build. The key is to integrate these various efforts and identify remaining gaps and how to fill them.

To guide discussions and stimulate debate, it is proposed that there are four principles on which to build a common vision and blueprint:

1. Respect and recognition First Nations and Metis peoples in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Region.

2. Strengthen the protection of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River ecosystem.3. Build adaptive and resilient communities. 4. Transition to a sustainable, low carbon platform while strengthening the region’s

competitiveness in the emerging ‘smart’ economy.

2.0 The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region in 2030

Envisioning the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Region in 2030 requires a basic understanding of the current context, the forces at play and their likely direction over the next 12 years. Based on the principles outlined above, this context and trends analysis is broken down into five areas: protecting ecosystem health; adaptive and resilient communities; transitioning to a sustainable, low carbon platform and strengthening the region’s competitiveness in the ‘smart’ economy; and due to its cross-cutting importance, we begin with Respect and Recognition of First Nations and Metis peoples in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region.

2.1 Respect and Recognition of First Nations and Metis peoples of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region

The Anishinaabe, including the Algonquin, the Nipissing, and the Chippewas and the Iroquois, including the Huron Wendat, and the Six Nations, the Mohawk, the Oneida, the Cayuga, the Onondaga, the Seneca, and the Tuscarora, are some of the tribes and First Nations that have called the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence home for thousands of years. Today, more than 130 bands of First Nations live in Ontario and Quebec.

The Mohawks call the St. Lawrence River Valley, Kaniatarowanenneh or the "big waterway". In Ojibwe, the Great Lakes are known as Nayaano-nibiimaang Gichigamiin, or The Five Freshwater Seas. Water has both a life sustaining and spiritually significant place in First Nations culture. It represents the interconnection among all living beings and teaches us about strength and the lifecycle, as “we will flow into the Great Ocean at the end of our life.”

Given the significance of the waters of the Nayaano-nibiimaang Gichigamiin and Kaniatarowanenneh, the input from First Nations and Metis into a vision and blueprint for the future of the region is critical. Issues range from the local, such as water quality

6

on reserve and the impact of pollutants originating off reserve, to much broader issues related to land claims, treaty rights, and the ongoing process of reconciliation.

While not all of these issues can be resolved through this process, engagement must be conducted in the spirit of reconciliation and in recognition of the importance of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence waters to indigenous peoples today. First Nations and Metis organisations will be consulted on the issues they want to explore through this process. Specific issues that may be explored could include increased investment in water systems and water protection initiatives, building resiliency in First Nations communities, and opportunities for First Nations businesses and youth in the low carbon economy.

2.2 Protecting the Region’s Ecosystem Health

The Great Lakes are so vast that they have been called the ‘sweet water seas’. In fact, the Great Lakes and freshwater stretch of the St. Lawrence are inland waterways, susceptible to the cumulative impact of pollution, habitat destruction, and the encroachment of expanding towns and cities. Lake Erie’s enormous algal blooms serve as a warning that these fresh waters need more vigilant protection. The Aral Sea in Russia and Lake Balkash in Asia are stark illustrations of the vulnerability of mega lakes to overexploitation. Despite binational and federal –provincial efforts to protect the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence, persistent pressures continue to threaten these invaluable waterways.

Climate ChangeThe Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region will be significantly impacted by climate change through to 2030 and beyond. It is anticipated that the climate in the Toronto region will be transformed to a subtropical climate more like current day Louisville, Kentucky. The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region is already experiencing the effects of climate change. It is experiencing more frequent and extreme storms, periods of drought, greater year to year variation in lake levels, shorter winters and earlier snow melts, and warmer waters.

These changes have widespread impacts on tourism, marine transportation, hydro power generation, agriculture, commercial and recreational fishing, forestry, and municipal infrastructure. For example, the region is experiencing shorter ski seasons, flooding of beaches, docks and marinas, and infrastructure damage after major storms. Droughts have led to crop loss. Warmer temperatures affect aquatic and terrestrial habitat and feed the growth of algal blooms. In the St. Lawrence, changes in the freshwater-saltwater transition zone are being observed, affecting both surface and groundwater supply. Stronger storms and higher sea levels are causing extensive erosion in the mouth of the St. Lawrence.

Climate change also brings greater risks to human health, from flash floods to heat related deaths during prolonged heat waves to the proliferation of insects carrying disease. On the other hand, a warmer region means a longer summer tourism season and longer growing seasons and periods for open shipping lanes. These and other impacts of

7

climate change demand continuous adaptation across a wide spectrum of industries and local government operations.

Water Quality and Quantity

Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants Municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are regulated through provincial permits. Notwithstanding these permitted discharges, during heavy storms a number of WWTPs on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence experience sewage bypasses. Billions of litres of untreated or partially treated sewage enters the Great lakes and St. Lawrence each year as a result of these bypasses. Cities like Toronto and Hamilton are investing in massive holding tanks to capture overflows and treat them after rain events, which will minimize or eliminate bypasses.

Excess NutrientsLake Erie is suffering from an explosion of harmful algal bloom growth, brought on by warmer waters, invasive species, intense storm and snowmelt events, and the resulting phosphorus loadings from agricultural and urban runoff. The spread of harmful algal blooms (HAB) poses a risk to ecosystems and human health as well as affecting commercial fishing, municipal drinking water systems and recreational activities. In 2014 the city of Toledo was forced to close its drinking water system for three days due to detection of microcystin, a neurotoxin found in HABs. On the Canadian side, Pelee Island has also had to close its public drinking water system due to HABs.

Canada, the US. as well as Ontario, Ohio, and Michigan have pledged to reduce phosphorus loadings into Lake Erie by 40 percent. The Province of Ontario has proposed to cap phosphorus loadings from large wastewater treatment plants in the Thames River and Lake Erie watersheds. This addresses the primary point sources. However, non-point sources, which represent about 80-85% of phosphorus loadings, remain unregulated. While good voluntary programs are promoting best practices in agriculture to reduce phosphorus loss, the sheer scale of farming in the Western end of Lake Erie and the intensity of storms due to climate change are causing soluble phosphorous loss despite implementation of these best practices.

Toxic ChemicalsPersistent, bioaccumulative pollutants are damaging to the entire Great Lakes and St. Lawrence ecosystem. While regulated or banned toxic chemicals levels have decreased over the last 40 years, in some areas their concentration levels remain higher than environmental quality guidelines or objectives. In general, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mercury and polybrominated diphenylethers (PBDEs) are still present in the Great Lakes in areas of concern (AOCs) and hazardous waste sites. Some chemicals are being transported by air current and remain a significant source of contaminants. New chemicals, for which wastewater treatment systems were not designed to remove, are an increasing concern.

8

Contaminants levels of PCBs, mercury, and dioxins causing fish consumption restrictions are still above recommendation levels in the Great Lakes St. Lawrence region. Other contaminants such as Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) are still being monitored. Warming waters and invasive species will likely also impact contaminants levels.

New chemicals and hazardous materials are being introduced into the region’s waters and air through products. The capacity for the Federal Government to verify all products before they are introduced into the marketplace is very limited. This has allowed products with chemicals like polybrominated diphenyl ethers or PBDEs (flame retardants) to be introduced into the environment through a wide-range of consumer products, including TVs, computers, electronics, motor vehicles, carpets, and furniture.

More recently, the use of microbeads in personal care products has been found to contribute to plastics pollution in the Great Lakes. While actions are now being taken to regulate some of these products, the inland waters of the region are already impacted.

Habitats, Wetlands & Fisheries

Habitat and Wetlands The region’s wetlands, forests and prairies, provide critical habitat to more than 3,500 species of plants and animals. The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence provide 22,000 kilometres of coastline that supports much of this essential habitat and biodiversity. However, industrial, recreational and residential development has encroached on this coastline in many areas. The destruction of wetlands have led to declines in some invertebrates, birds and plants. Binational efforts to protect and restore lost and degraded coastal wetlands have brought signs of improvements, with some birds and amphibian population show recent stable populations. The loss of wetlands and their ecosystems are affecting commercial and sport fishing activities and natural and cultural heritage. Some fish and wildlife species have been affected and declined at a dramatic level where they are now considered endangered species and protected under the Ontario 2007 Endangered Species Act.

Climate change will continue to have an impact on habitat and wetlands. The general increase in temperatures will affect the composition of forest and cause a move northward of tree species. Forests are also more likely to be at risk of droughts, fire and to invasive species.

FisheriesContributing over $2.5 billion to the domestic economy annually, Canada’s recreational and commercial fishing industry is a valuable asset to both the Canadian economy and way of life. In the past thirty years, annual fish harvests have seen a decline of over fifty percent. This decline is expected to continue into 2030. In Canada, commercial fishing is concentrated in the western basin of Lake Erie, which is responsible for nearly 80 percent of the total value of Ontario’s $234 million commercial fishery. Ontario’s commercial fishing on Lake Erie is responsible for over 700 jobs with a GDP of over $28 million with an additional 800 jobs and $77 million in GDP related to fish processing.

9

In Canada, recreational fishing participation rates on the Great Lakes have declined by two percent over the past few decades, a trend that is expected to continue out to 2030. Anglers on the Great Lakes, over 78% of which are Ontario residents, contribute over $600 million directly and indirectly to the Canadian economy each year. Recreational fishing on the St. Lawrence River, which is only 6% of the size of the Great Lakes recreational fishing population, is growing marginally.

Canada’s sport fishing in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence will see a change in the availability of cold-water fish species as water temperatures increase throughout the basin. Sport fishermen seeking specific cold-water fish species might relocate to other water bodies outside of the basin for fishing, such a northern Ontario or Quebec.

Aquatic invasive species, overexploitation, and habitat alterations loom as some of the largest threats to fish populations in the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence basin. Shoreline population growth and climate change will also exacerbate these stresses on commercial and recreational fishing.

Efforts to protect and restore fisheries have shown some progress. Native predators populations are varying but mostly improving, especially walleye and lake trout. Lake sturgeon will take longer to show improvement but rehabilitation projects and wetlands improvements are an encouraging trend. There are worrying signs in fish and fish habitat, particularly the disruption of the bottom of the food chain, the threat of invasive species like zebra mussels and Asian carp, and warming waters due to climate change. In Lake Ontario, the food chain is being disrupted by low nutrients levels and a decrease in zooplankton and small bottom-dwelling shrimp-like species (a main source of food for fish), which have decreased because of the invasive zebra and quagga Mussels.

There are over 180 aquatic non-native or invasive species in the Great Lakes basin. The rate of introduction has reduced substantially largely as a result of improvements in ballast water exchange practices. Only 1 new aquatic invasive species has been found since 2006. Nevertheless, existing aquatic invasive species have cause a rapid decline in some native species, disrupting the native natural food chain and ecosystem balance, and causing algae and clogging problems.

Sea lamprey population has been significantly reduce throughout the basin, but is still a predator to lake trout, walleye and lake sturgeon and disrupts the natural ecosystem. Zebra and quagga mussels, are prominent invasive species disrupting zooplankton and phytoplankton communities, nutrient cycle and water clarity. Five terrestrial invasive species – phragmites, purple loosestrife, garlic mustard, emerald ash borer and Asian long-horned beetle – are disrupting ecosystems, habitat and water quality. They are the focus of binational efforts for early detection, rapid responses program and prevention efforts.

The region remains vulnerable to new invasive species and climate change might be an additional element in helping them to spread across the Great Lakes basin. Chief among these threats is the introduction of Asian carp. While already present in the St. Lawrence

10

River, two species of Asian carp, bighead and silver, are mere kilometres from entering the Great Lakes basin through the Chicago Area Waterway System (CAWS) in the United States. The CAWS provides a connection between the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes and an entry point for Asian carp. An electric barrier is currently the primary mechanism for prevent aquatic invasive species migration into the Great Lakes, however, many natural resource manager have advocated for restoring the historic natural divide that once separated the Mississippi River and Great Lakes basins. If not successfully prevented from entering the Great Lakes basin, the future health of Great Lakes ecosystems and the fishery is at risk.

Legacy Pollution and RehabilitationAs a result of its industrial history, a number of shoreline areas were left in severely degraded condition as industries closed or moved on. Efforts to address legacy pollution in these areas around the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence basin are proceeding through rehabilitation efforts in Areas of Concern identified under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement and Zones D’intervention Prioritaire (ZIP - area of prime concern), identified under the St. Lawrence Plan.

The Priority Intervention Zone Program (ZIP) has been established in 1994 through a bilateral initiative from the federal and Quebec governments to promote local communities involvement in the protection, restoration, conservation and enhancement of the St. Lawrence’s uses and resources. There are fourteen ZIP committees in Quebec, eight of which are located in the freshwater zone and six in the marine zone. All are regrouped under the Stratégies Saint-Laurent network, which aims to represent their needs to various governments, promote cooperation and coordination among them, provides training, consultation, documentation and workshops, ensures the dissemination of information and provides them with scientific and technical support. Each ZIP area has had an environmental assessment conducted by provincial and federal researchers that includes technical reports, biological, chemical, socio-economical and human health aspects. The ZIP committees hold public consultations to discuss environmental issues and identify priority interventions with local stakeholders.

The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement originally identified 17 Areas of Concern on the Canadian side of the Great Lakes. These AOCs were identified due to their significant impairment as a result of legacy pollution. Three of these, Collingwood Harbour and Severn Sound on Georgian Bay, and Wheatley Harbour on Lake Erie, have been cleaned up and removed from the AOC list, Spanish Harbour and Jackfish Bay are in recovery, having completed clean up projects. There remain twelve AOCs that need significant investments in rehabilitation efforts to be cleaned up and delisted. These include Thunder Bay, Nipigon Bay, Peninsula Harbour, St. Mary’s River, St. Clair River, Detroit River, Niagara River, Hamilton Harbour, Toronto and Region, Port Hope Harbour, Bay of Quinte, and the St. Lawrence River.

11

2.3 Adaptive and Resilient Communities

The Great Lakes St. Lawrence population is characterized by its high concentration in metropolitan areas. Over 80% of Canadians live in cities. In Quebec and Ontario, a large portion of the population lives in the Montreal and Toronto regions. The population of Quebec is expected to grow from the current 8.3 million to 9 million by 2030.1 Much of the growth in Quebec along the St. Lawrence River will be in the Montreal Metropolitan area, and to a lesser extent in the Quebec Metropolitan region.

The population of Ontario is expected to grow from the current 14 million to 16.7 million by 2030.2 Much of this growth will be in the Greater Toronto area, and around the western end of Lake Ontario, known as the Golden Horseshoe.

How this increased population growth is integrated into existing communities will in part determine how resilient and adaptive our communities will be by 2030. The provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area has provided a path forward that promotes greater urban density and the co-location of jobs and people. Reducing our communities’ carbon footprint will depend on choices related to land use, transportation, and building heating and design.

For example, while our big urban centres are well served with public transit, surrounding suburban centres and smaller towns and cities are not. Suburban areas and smaller centres remain highly car-dependent. Developing transit systems that can move people more efficiently and affordably with a lower carbon footprint will be an essential ingredient to a sustainable, resilient future.

Making communities more climate-resilient is also critical. Already, climate change related intense rainfall and rapid snowmelts have caused extensive flooding and damage in areas such as the Richelieu valley, Thunder Bay and Toronto. Changes in land use design, stormwater management, and infrastructure investments will be needed to make communities more flood-resilient.

The legacy of industrial activity and the hardening of shorelines has an impact on communities and the ecosystems they support. In cities like Thunder Bay and Quebec City, efforts to naturalize and revitalize waterfronts have already produced significant dividends to these communities.

Reducing their carbon footprint, adapting and building resiliency to climate change, and making waterfronts publicly accessible with greater habitat vitality are three great challenges for communities through to 2030 and beyond.

1 Statistics Canada, Projections démographiques pour le Canada, les provinces et les territoires (Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2010), www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/91-520-x/91-520-x2010001-fra.pdf.2 Ontario Ministry of Finance, Ontario Population Projections Update, 2016-2014 (Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Finance, 2017), www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/economy/demographics/projections/projections- 2016-2041.pdf.

12

2.4 Transitioning to a sustainable, low carbon platform and strengthening the region’s competitiveness in the ‘smart’ economy

Reducing Greenhous Gases (GHGs)The Federal Government and most provinces have committed to a Pan Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change to reduce GHG emissions to 523 metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent by 2030. Towards this effort, the federal government is providing $2 billion over five years, to support provincial and territorial actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through a new Low Carbon Economy Fund.  

Quebec and Ontario each have their own climate action plans and are jointly participating in a cap and trade program with the state of California to reduce GHGs. The 2030 GHG reduction targets for Quebec and Ontario are 37.5% and 37% respectively, based on 1990 emissions, and are the most ambitious 2030 provincial targets in the country. These goals will be attained by progressively lowering the maximum GHG cap. The money raised by selling emissions credits will be reinvested back into projects that reduce GHG emissions, like public transit or green renewable energy technologies.

In Ontario, the Five-Year Climate Change Action Plan (ON Action Plan) was adopted in June 2016, which outlines initiatives to combat climate change, including electric vehicle promotion and infrastructure, a green bank for energy efficiency, and funding to help businesses transition to low carbon technologies. However, prior to the adoption of the ON Action Plan the province took steps to reduce its GHG emissions, most notably the 2007 regulation mandating the cessation of coal-fired power plants by December 2014. Ontario successfully eliminated coal generation in the province by April 2014 while simultaneously introducing a Feed-in Tariff (FIT) program then a Large Renewable Procurement (LRP) program to encourage renewable energy development. Due to the sufficient renewable energy capacity and public concern over rising electricity prices, the Minister of Energy suspended the LRP program in September 2016. In an effort to diversify its climate actions, the province recently adopted the Climate Change Mitigation and Low-carbon Economy Act (Ont CC Act). The Ontario Climate Change Act supports participation in Quebec and California’s cap and trade regime, and sets targets for GHG reduction. As compared to 1990 levels, the Ontario Climate Change Act calls for a 37 percent reduction in GHG emissions by 2030. Emissions forecasts predict meeting this target will be a challenge.

In Quebec, the 2013-2020 Climate Action Plan, which mandates a 20 percent reduction in GHG levels by 2020, is the province’s primary policy to address GHG emissions and climate action in the short-term. Quebec has utilized a cap and trade scheme since 2013 in partnership with California to reduce emissions in the industrial and electricity sectors. Since the province generates nearly 99 percent of its electricity from renewable sources, specifically hydropower, the policy has not impacted provincial electricity generation. The billions in funds generated by the sale of carbon credits in the cap and trade scheme are being used to finance sustainable development initiatives laid out in the Climate

13

Action Plan. More recently, policies have been introduced to reduce GHG emission in the transportation sector by encouraging the sale and manufacturing of electric vehicles. Renewable EnergyOntario and Quebec are far ahead in generating energy through renewable sources, including hydro, wind, solar and in limited amounts, biomass. Geothermal and marine energy have yet to be developed or are only at a small scale.

In 2015, 66% of Canada’s electricity was generated by renewable energy, a 10% increase of the 2005 levels. Hydroelectricity is the main source of electricity in Canada. At the national level, it accounts for 60% and varies from one province to another. Wind energy provides 4.4% of Canada’s total electricity and had a 20% growth rate over the 2011-2016 period, due to $3 billion in investments in wind energy projects in Ontario and Quebec. Solar energy represents 0.5% of the total Canadian electricity, though it is concentrated in Ontario with 98% of the Canadian solar capacity and provides 5% of the province’s total electricity. In 2014, there were about 70 biomass generating power plants mostly relying on wood, wood-by-products and landfill gas. Moreover, projects are being developed to produce electricity from tidal movement, offshore wind and geothermal energy.

Both Ontario and Quebec are moving toward an energy transition to increase their renewable energy production in the next decade. Notably, Ontario phased out coal energy in 2014. Electricity production from renewable energy has increased from 22% to 32% due to a significant increase in solar, wind and bioenergy production. In its Long Term Energy Plan, the Ontario Government has committed to increase the hydroelectricity energy production and pursue investments in solar, wind and bio energies; the goal is to reach 28% of wind, solar and bio electricity supply in 2040.

The province of Quebec is a global leader in hydroelectricity, with over 97% of its electricity produced by hydropower. The Quebec government 2030 Energy Policy aims to eliminate the use of thermal coal, anticipating increases of 25% in overall renewable energy output and increases of bioenergy production by 50%. Wind energy production is the fastest growing segment of renewables in Quebec.  The focus of the energy transition in the province will be on reducing hydrocarbons consumption, in areas such as transportation of persons and goods.

Transition from a manufacturing based economy to a technology-driven smart economyThe Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region is a key driver of the Canadian economy, a gateway to the US market, and a critical global trade corridor. The Great Lakes St. Lawrence region account for over 50% of Canada’s total GDP.

Long the manufacturing heartland of the country, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region’s economy continues its gradual transformation, from its strong manufacturing base to one increasingly dependent on the services sector, and in some areas, the logistics sector. At the same time, labour intensity continues to decline, due to automation. Global competition for Ontario exports will continue to be challenging.

14

The region has an export-oriented economy and is heavily dependent on Canada-U.S. trade. Canada trade to the United States is three times higher than to the rest of the world combined. Two billion dollars in goods and services cross the Canada-US border every day. Two-way trade in goods and services has doubled since the inception of the North American Free Trade Agreement, (NAFTA) in 1994. The outcome of the current renegotiation of NAFTA is therefore critical to the future prosperity of the region.3

Notwithstanding the primacy of the Canada-US trade relationship, other regional trade agreements, such as the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, and the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement hold the promise of increased trade with other trading partners. Emerging markets may also offer new growth opportunities.4

InnovationTechnological innovation continues at an ever increasing rate, Asian markets, and China in particular, are making a rapid transition towards renewables and electric vehicles. Canada’s export oriented economy and global competitiveness will rely in part on the speed with which it can innovate and market new technologies that promote low carbon growth. It is critical that Canadian companies are not left behind in this next innovation wave.

Canada is far behind the international pack when it comes to expenditures in research and development. Canada’s R&D expenditures represent 1.69% of GDP, compared to the OECD average of 2.36%.5 Even in clusters that are considered leaders in R&D, Canada is a small player. According to the McKinsey Global Institute, the combined value of the technology cluster in Toronto, Kitchener, and Waterloo is $9.9 billion, compared to Silicon Valley at $410.9 billion.

The needed level of private sector investment in R&D has so far been difficult to secure. To compensate, governments have invested heavily in academic research. However, this research does not always translate into commercially viable innovations. The Conference Board of Canada has recommended that public R&D investment be increased to make up for the deficiency in private R&D investment. At 0.84 per cent of GDP, Canada’s public R&D spending is about the middle of the OECD pack, ahead of the US and the UK, but well behind Scandinavian countries.

The Federal Government recently announced a $950 M supercluster growth strategy, to promote the growth of superclusters in advanced manufacturing, agrifood, clean tech, digital tech, health/biosciences, infrastructure and transportation. The Federal 3 Mark Fisher, Jeff Phillips, and Jesse Shuster-Leibner, “International trade and the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region,” Institute for Research on Public Policy, August 11, 2017, http://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/august-2017/international-trade-great-lakes-st-lawrence-region.4 Ontario Ministry of Finance, Ontario’s Long Term Report on the Economy (Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Finance, 2017), https://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/economy/ltr/2017/ltr2017.pdf.5 Statistics Canada, “Spending on research and development, 2015,” The Daily, September 23, 2015, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/150923/dq150923b-eng.pdf.

15

Government is also embarking on a review of all its programs that support innovation across departments to rationalize the programs and create a one-window approach.

Economic Sectors of Strategic Importance to the Low Carbon EconomyThe auto sector and agricultural sector remain the two largest sectors in the Ontario economy. In Quebec, the aerospace sector drives a significant amount of R&D in the Region. However, the tech sector is the most disruptive sector that is facilitating the emerging ‘smart’ economy. Fortunately, both Ontario and Quebec are showing great strength in this emerging sector. Each of these sectors will see significant changes driven by the transition to a low carbon economy. How these sectors evolve and adapt will largely dictate the direction of the regional economy by 2030.

TechThe tech sector is most commonly associated with information and communication technologies, but can be defined more broadly to include other sectors, including architecture, engineering and design, chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturing, machinery and specialized manufacturing, aerospace manufacturing, and scientific R& D.

According to the Brookfield Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Canada’s tech sector contributed $117 billion to the national GDP and 9.1 billion in research and development in 2016. Four of Canada’s five top technology hubs are located in the Great Lakes St. Lawrence basin- in Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, and Kitchener-Waterloo. The sector’s 71,000 firms employ over 850,000 Canadians.

Particularly given the downturn in the oil sector, the tech sector is one of the fastest growing sectors in the region and the country and certainly one of the most strategically important for the region’s future competitiveness and sustainability.

The so-called emerging ‘smart’ economy is based on knowledge and innovation and driven by technology. Using technological innovation, the smart economy fosters entrepreneurship and can be applied to more sustainable, smart growth in cities. It also can result in increased productivity and competitiveness, hence the all-important opportunity to connect the current technological revolution to smarter, more sustainable growth.

Some key trends in this technology-driven ‘smart’ economy have been identified by Deloitte Canada: IT unbounded: The boundaries surrounding IT are fading as technology becomes

integral to almost every business function and relationship. Dark analytics: Advances in computer vision and pattern recognition allow

companies to unlock insights from unstructured data that, until now, have been lost in the dark. 

Machine intelligence: Machine intelligence is helping companies make better decisions, embed complex analytics into customer and employee interactions, and – with adoption of bots and robotic process automation – automate increasingly difficult tasks. 

16

Mixed reality: Companies are exploring more immersive and engaging ways to combine the physical world and digital systems, creating a new, mixed reality that is more natural, intuitive and intelligent. 

Inevitable architecture: Open standards, cloud-first designs, and loosely coupled architectures are the norm in start-ups. Now, large enterprises have similar ambitions.

Everything-as-a-service: Traditional business products are being reimagined as services as organizations modernize core systems and the technology stack.

Blockchain: Trust economy: Blockchain is emerging as the mainstay for digital identities in the emerging trust economy. 

Exponentials watch list: Advances in disruption forces like synthetic biology, energy storage, quantum computing, and nanotech could exponentially transform the way we do business.

Given the speed and amplitude of these enormous technological shifts, the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region must proactively position itself to compete and succeed in this emerging smart economy. That will require adaptation in all sectors, and most importantly, will be driven by cross cutting technological innovation.

Auto ManufacturingThe Canadian automotive sector is the eighth largest in the world. In 2012, the automotive manufacturing sector employs 115,000 workers in Canada, 82% in Ontario and 6.5% in Quebec.

Automotive manufacturing is going through a major transformation with the introduction of new technologies in vehicles, from telematics to autonomous vehicles to additive manufacturing (industrial 3D printing), and electric vehicles. New technologies integrated in new vehicles are expected to account for up to 20% of a vehicle’s value as soon as 2020, compare to 13% in 2015. It remains to be seen whether the region’s existing suppliers can meet the demands of these new technologies, in competition with new entrants from Silicon Valley and other high tech hubs.

From an environmental point of view, the anticipated acceleration in the adoption of electric vehicles may be one of the most significant carbon reduction changes of the century. Both France and Britain have declared a ban on the sale of gas and diesel powered cars as of 2040, a claim that would have seemed unthinkable only a few years ago, but now is nearly a moot point. Auto industry experts are now predicting that the price and technology tipping point in favour of electric vehicles may occur as early as 2023.

The extent to which auto manufacturers, auto parts manufacturers, and companies servicing the auto sector with new technologies can seize on the current trends towards low emission or no emission vehicles will be a significant determinant of the future of the industry in the Great Lakes St. Lawrence region.

Agriculture

17

The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region are fortunate to have an abundance of fertile land. Both Ontario and Quebec have significant grain, livestock and dairy industries, as well as fruit, vegetable and greenhouse operations. In Quebec, the main crops are corn grain, soybeans and oats, with a 27% increase in soybeans since 2011. Quebec is the top producer of fruits, berries and nuts in Canada. Ontario accounts for a quarter of total farms in Canada. The number of farms has decreased by 4.5% over the last 5 years, continuing the trend of larger farming operations replacing the ‘family farms. Ontario leads the country in soybean and corn grain.

Grain producers in Quebec and Ontario have adopted environmental techniques such as minimum till farming, precision agriculture technologies, and plant and seed biotechnology to improve soil management practices, crop rotations to improve soil productivity and break pest cycles, and the use of cover crops to reduce erosion and nutrient loss. A variety of programs help farmers in Ontario and Quebec to adopt new practices, such as the Ontario Environmental Farm Plans or Quebec Grain Producers’ life-cycle analysis, which help farmers to identify goals and possible improvements.

Climate change is quite literally a game changer for agriculture. More extreme weather events for a weather-dependent industry creates a number of challenges. Extreme heat can result in livestock death, especially poultry. Crop yields can be impacted by both drought and extreme moisture. Intense rainfall and rapid snowmelts can result in the loss of phosphorus from fields and into waterways. Algae blooms in Lake Erie are largely driven by phosphorous concentrations in agricultural runoff from the Maumee basin.

At the same time, there may be opportunities with climate change. Longer growing seasons and higher temperatures could result in better yields and the introduction of new produce. Carbon sequestration through no or low till ploughing methods could reduce a farm’s carbon footprint. And shorter winters will reduce energy costs. Helping farmers and landowners prepare for climate change and its impacts on their business will be a major challenge over the coming decade.

AerospaceThe aerospace industry in Canada, mostly concentrated in Ontario and Quebec, is a major employer and contributor on the national scale. It alone generates up to 30% of overall Canadian manufacturing R&D. The Canadian aerospace industry remains a global leader in civil airplanes, helicopters, engines and flight simulators, with some major companies like Bombardier located within the Great Lakes St. Lawrence region.

Like all other GHG intensive sectors, the aerospace industry is being challenged to reduce its carbon footprint. The Quebec Government is supporting a greening initiative called Systemes Aeronautiques D’avant-Guarde pour l’environnement (SAGE), which is conducting research on reducing GHGs through operational improvements, and changes in materials and aerodynamic design. The industry has an added pressure to reduce its emissions, to meet the European Union aviation directive that caps aircraft emissions.6

6 Danielle Elliot, “4 Steps to Reducing Aviation’s Carbon Footprint,” Intelex, July 30, 2015, https://blog.intelex.com/2015/07/30/4-steps-to-reducing-aviations-carbon-footprint/;

18

TransportationTo remain competitive in the global economy, and manage anticipated growth in population and goods movement, the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region must be able to move people and freight efficiently.

Road travel remains the primary method of transportation in the region, representing a problem for growth, due to congestion. The Canadian Chamber of Commerce has estimated that congestion is costing Canada $15 billion per year, equivalent to almost 1% of Canada’s GDP (Canadian Infrastructure Report, 2016). At the same time, so long as cars depend on the combustion engine, road travel will contribute significant amounts of GHG emissions. Transportation contributes about 27% of GHG emissions in Canada, of which 70% come from road travel.

GHG emissions and congestion problems that come from a growing population and increased freight traffic are prompting discussions on promoting modes of transportation that would have the duel benefit of reducing congestion and GHG emissions.

Marine TransportationThe Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region is defined by its seaway, a marine corridor that traverses the entire region, with ports and ships dotting the shoreline that move millions of dollars of cargo per year. It is estimated that $35 billion in economic activity and 227,000 jobs are directly tied to the shipping industry.

The overwhelming majority of shipping on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River is bulk goods, agricultural bulk goods, such as soy and grains, aggregate resources, such as salt, gravel, and sand, and mineral resources, such as iron ore and coal. There are strong arguments for the expansion of marine transportation. It has a smaller carbon footprint and can reduce congestion on roads. Many major Canadian ports have unused or underutilized property and can increase capacity. Some ports, such as Hamilton, Windsor, and Thunder Bay, have additional capacity and railroad connections.

There are a number of big-ticket investments being made by major players in the shipping industry to increase efficiency of the system as a method to lower costs, in an effort to push up the margins of shippers and of the system operators. Carriers spent $2.9 billion on new vessels and vessel upgrades between 2009 and 2013. The public-sector corporations are also undergoing numerous infrastructure upgrades to decrease wait-times at locks.

An important outstanding infrastructure investment is the aging locks at Sault Ste. Marie, an essential link for maritime trade through the Great Lakes. An average of 4000 ships carrying 80 tonnes of cargo travel through the locks. It is estimated that the replacement cost of one of the locks is $500M. It will be important to explore an increased role for marine transportation in a low carbon economy.

Rail

19

Given the relatively short distances between centres in the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Region, the use of rail for the transportation of people and freight makes sense. Despite this geography, the low cost of road transportation and the lack of investment in the rail system has made rail the poor transportation cousin in the region.

While passenger use of rail has increased within metropolitan regions (GO transit, Metrolinx, Reseau de Transport Metropolitain), rail has steadily lost market share for longer distances. Rail networks share many similar challenges to road networks in the basin. Much like highway networks, railways tend to face bottlenecks in urban centres but underutilization in rural areas. The Ontario government sees promise in developing its passenger railway capability, as a possible solution to roadway congestion. The Ontario Government has adopted the Big Move, an $11 billion regional transportation strategy for the Greater Golden Horseshoe being implemented through an arms-length agency, Metrolinx. The Ontario Government is also considering a high speed train to link Windsor to Toronto. This could ultimately be expanded through to Quebec City, providing a high speed link through a large swath of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region. Investment in rail travel and improved service through dedicated tracks could contribute significantly to reduced congestion and GHG emissions.

Trade Corridors and Border Management The movement of goods across the Canada-U.S. border is of paramount importance to the health of the Great Lakes St. Lawrence economy. It affects practically every business in Ontario and Quebec. Over CDN $1 billion in trade crosses the Canada-U.S. border everyday, of which $600 million flows through Ontario.

Delays at the bottlenecks across the border, particularly between Detroit and Windsor, cost the entire region. A four hour delay at the Ambassador Bridge costs the Ontario economy approximately $7 million in lost production. According to the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, by the year 2030, delays in the Detroit-Windsor corridor alone could result in direct costs to Canada and the US of more than CDN$17.8 billion a year and result in over 70,000 jobs lost in Canada.

This past summer, the Canadian federal government announced plans to invest $2 billion into trade and transport infrastructure, including trade routes along the border with the U.S. that are suffering from congestion. The Federal Government has also reached agreement with U.S. authorities to construct a new bridge across the Detroit River at Windsor. However, this may be delayed by legal action by the current private owner of the existing Ambassador Bridge.

Since 9/11, border security concerns have been paramount on the U.S. side. Canada and the U.S. have committed to the Smart Border Action Plan, to reduce congestion while maintaining a high level of security at border crossings. These efforts are being supported by the Federal Government’s Border Infrastructure Fund. Improvements are being made to highways and border crossings in the Sarnia, Niagara and London areas.

20

3.0 A Process to Develop the Vision and Blueprint

3.1 Objectives

The Collaborative envisions a collaborative process to create a compelling, shared vision for an economically vibrant and ecologically thriving Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region and an outcomes-based blueprint for action that charts a path forward for the region. Developing and implementing such a vision and blueprint will require an unprecedented level of collaboration to ensure actions taken by all levels of government and external stakeholders are aligned.

It is essential that the vision and blueprint be developed and implemented by building on existing or planned efforts. A number of other initiatives are underway that share similar goals, including the Century Initiative (www.centuryinitiative.ca), Quebec, Ontario and Canada’s Climate Change Action Plans, and the Ontario Government’s Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (www.placestogrow.ca). It is intended that this Collaborative would complement and support rather than supersede existing environmental agreements, such as the COA and the SLAP.

The objectives of the collaborative process are to:1. Reach a common vision and outcomes-based blueprint to make the Region a

leader on ecosystem protection, adaptive and resilient communities, and low carbon, sustainable economic growth.

2. Undertake a strategic examination of federal, provincial, and local investments, programs, budgets and other relevant activities to determine how they may be integrated to more effectively protect the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence ecosystem, promote sustainable and resilient communities, and stimulate the low-carbon economy.

3. Secure the federal government’s endorsement of the vision and blueprint, and its commitment to finance the implementation of the plan, along with other levels of government, while leveraging investments by business, NGOs and philanthropic organizations, etc.

3.2 Learning from the U.S. Great Lakes Regional Collaboration

The success of the U.S. Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) process was a strong inspiration for this proposed Canadian Collaborative process. Not only did it create new and lasting partnerships among myriad interests, it also resulted in a tangible, actionable plan to restore the Great Lakes. More remarkably, the plan was based on the consensus of the participants, giving it a high degree of legitimacy in the eyes of government officials and NGOs alike. The GLRC action plan motivated President Barack Obama to initiate the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative in 2010, which has provided approximately $300 million annually to the region for restoration work, for a total to date of over $2 billion.

21

The course leading to the U.S. Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) offers some guidance as Canada considers its own collaborative process. In the United States, Congress and the Administration, starting around the year 2000, realized that the region lacked a restoration strategy for the Great Lakes; without such a strategy, an ambitious restoration effort would not occur. To develop the strategy, President George W. Bush ordered the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC) by Executive Order 13340, which acknowledged the national significance of the Great Lakes and called for collaboration to outline specific restoration needs. The Order resulted in the formation of a Great Lakes Interagency Task Force, which was comprised of federal cabinet secretaries, so that the federal agencies could better coordinate their programs. It also set in motion the development of a targeted, cost-effective action plan to restore the Great Lakes, a directive that created a collaborative process called the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration (GLRC). Through GLRC, thousands of federal, state, tribal, and local elected officials and outside stakeholders came together to identify specific restoration needs and develop action plans for implementation.

The first step was to identify and agree upon the scope of the GLRC. The eight Great Lakes governors, after considerable consultation, identified eight issue areas that needed critical attention:

● Aquatic invasive species● Habitat/species● Coastal health● Areas of Concern and contaminated sediments● Nonpoint source pollution● Toxic pollution● Indicators and information● Sustainable development

The next step was to develop action plans for each of the issue areas. To do so, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), at the direction of the White House, asked more than 1,500 people inside and outside of government, representing a wide range of perspectives, to participate in the collaborative effort. The intent was for any product arising from the collaboration to reflect the consensus of the participants. Each issue area constituted a “strategy team,” comprising a largely self-selected subset of the 1,500 participants. (It is important to note that although the U.S. EPA led the process, the GLRC was intended to involve all participants, regardless of agency, order of government, or affiliation, cooperate.) After a year of intense discussion, conference calls, and face-to-face meetings, the eight strategy teams submitted their products to the EPA. The final document was the “Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy,” an action plan that outlined restoration needs—both in terms of funds and legislation—and the way to address those needs. The GLRC process was deemed a great success for four main reasons:

22

1. It brought together a wide range of interests and experts and gave them a specific task. Thus, at the minimum, the effort established new relationships and strengthened existing ones.

2. It led to the development of a specific action plan; a plan that reflected the consensus of the participants and, thus, heightened the likelihood that it would be widely accepted and implemented.

3. It helped government and stakeholders understand which agencies (at which order of government) were carrying out which programs for the Great Lakes (and, of course, identified programmatic gaps).

4. It informed the Administration and Congress about budgetary and legislative needs so that future initiatives would be defensible.

Funding and legislative action to promote Great Lakes restoration, rooted heavily in the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy, began in 2010 when President Obama launched the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI). The GLRI used the collaboration strategy as the justification for a large-scale restoration effort. President Obama directed the federal agencies to work more closely together for the Great Lakes and he set out to accelerate efforts to protect and improve the resources of the region. Perhaps most importantly, the GLRI came with considerable federal resources, approximately $300 million annually. Like the GLRC, the GLRI relied on the leadership of the U.S. EPA, though also like the GLRC, the EPA was the facilitator, as the process was collaborative across government and with stakeholders. Indeed, federal agencies, states agencies, tribes, and NGOs were all eligible to receive GLRI funding for projects. To guide allocation of GLRI funds, the EPA, in consultation with many stakeholders, developed a GLRI Action Plan that consolidated the GLRC’s eight “issue areas” into five “focus areas”:● Cleaning up toxics and areas of concern● Combating invasive species● Promoting nearshore health by protecting watersheds from polluted runoff● Restoring wetlands and other habitats● Tracking progress, education and working with strategic partners

Each focus area contained a problem statement, goals, objectives, measures of progress, targets, and actions needed to support the objectives. The action plan, and accompanying reports to Congress that outline progress toward restoration, guides the GLRI. A key to the success of the GLRC and later the GLRI has been strong bi-partisan support in Congress, at the state and local level of government, and throughout the NGO community. The strength of this bi-partisan support in Congress has so far prevented the GLRI budget from being eliminated by the new Administration.

3.3 Process to Develop a Shared Vision and Blueprint

Inspired by the inclusive and successful GLRC process that resulted in the GLRI described above, the Collaborative envisions a process that includes the following steps:

23

Step 1: Undertake preliminary Issue and stakeholder scan and initial stakeholder engagementDue to the size and complexity of the watershed of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River, there are numerous interests, institutions and governmental priorities that need to be understood before initiating a collaborative review of protection and restoration activities in the basin. Therefore, as a first step in framing the development of a unified vision and strategy, the Collaborative has undertaken early stakeholder engagement and a stakeholder and issue scan to inform the scope and design of the process. Early stakeholder engagement will begin in October 2017 with the circulation of this discussion paper to key stakeholders in the Great Lakes St. Lawrence basin. Feedback from stakeholders on the proposed scope and process of the Collaborative is being sought through written comments as well as face-to-face roundtable meetings in Quebec and Ontario to be held in October and November 2017. Stakeholder input is also being sought through a scan of stakeholders’ issues and interests being undertaken by the Collaborative in collaboration with the de Gaspé Beaubien Foundation and Mitacs. Mitacs has been contacting stakeholders through the summer with a request to complete a survey and/or participate in telephone interviews. The aim of this external research is to identify common as well as divergent interests, opportunities for stronger collaboration or alignment, and critical investment gaps or programmatic weaknesses. In this first step, all the parties who have been or want to be involved in the collaborative will have the opportunity to voice their main issues, concerns, and goals in the upcoming engagement process. This initial stakeholder engagement and scan will help the Collaborative identify additional background information and make recommendations regarding the design of the collaboration process. This Discussion paper will be revised based on this initial stakeholder input and scan and presented to the Federal Minister of the Environment and other federal decision makers on Great Lakes St. Lawrence Parliament Hill Day, November 21, 2017. It will simultaneously be shared with elected officials in the Ontario and Quebec Governments and regional First Nation associations.

Step 2: Secure Federal-Provincial-First Nation endorsement and financing of the processBefore the process can proceed, it is vital to secure the public endorsement of the process by the Governments of Canada, Quebec and Ontario, and First Nations leaders. As part of this endorsement, it is critical for these governments to publicly encourage stakeholders to get involved.

It is also essential to secure the necessary funding to proceed with the process, estimated at $1.5 million over two years, assuming that the Secretariat is external to government.

24

Finally, it is essential that senior officials from the Federal and Quebec and Ontario Governments and First Nations organisations commit to participating in the process at the Executive Committee level and through the issue tables. .

Step 3: Establish structure and secure budget for processTo devise a new vision and blueprint for the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River in Canada, a structure must be established to provide strategic direction. It is proposed that this include a steering committee, a cross-departmental federal-provincial task force and inclusive engagement with a broad cross section of stakeholders through an advisory committee. Specific sectoral plans will be developed by issue teams with representation from the steering committee partners and experts and stakeholder representatives.

It is proposed that the structure to be followed would involve: 1. An Executive Committee with representation from key Great Lakes St. Lawrence

organisations (e.g. environmental, economic, municipal) and senior representatives from the Governments of Canada, Quebec and Ontario, and First Nations.

2. An interdepartmental and intergovernmental task force (Federal, Ontario and Quebec governments and First Nation representatives)

3. A multi-stakeholder advisory group (First Nations, local governments, environmental and business NGOs)

4. Issues strategy teams (Dual Government/Stakeholders)a. Both groups share the leadership on the teams, alternating chair, and

secretariat.b. Each team develops an action plan to address a specific issue.c. Four strategy teams are proposed:

i. Ecosystem Healthii. Local Communitiesiii. First Nations/Metisiv. Low Carbon ‘Smart’ Economy Transition

This structure should be led administratively by a multi-departmental secretariat within the Federal Government, OR an external administrative body overseen by the five Collaborative partners. It is anticipated that the secretariat would be staffed with six personnel: one executive director, one administrative assistant, and four project managers with direct responsibility for issues represented by the issue teams. The budget for such a structure is detailed below.

25

Step 4: Stakeholder engagementThe Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region has a wide range of engaged interest groups, comprised of businesses and business associations, environmental NGOs, tourism, recreational and fishery organizations, shoreline local governments, conservation authorities, and First Nations and Metis associations. The Collaborative will bring all of these groups together, to create an inclusive stakeholder engagement process. While these stakeholders do not always agree, they are used to working together and with government agencies and, thus, the above-noted process would likely thrive in an atmosphere of cooperation. Nevertheless, it cannot be underestimated how challenging it will be to reach consensus on some issues. The inclusiveness, integrity, and transparency of the stakeholder engagement process will therefore be vital to the success of the Collaborative. The process to arrive at a shared vision and blueprint will be highly collaborative and inclusive, drawing on the experience and knowledge of a range of concerned stakeholders. It is envisioned that stakeholders will be involved throughout the process in defining priorities and making recommendations on needed investments and programming. Stakeholders will be involved in the process through the multi-stakeholder advisory group and on issue tables, as proposed above. A summit will also present the draft conclusions of the process to a wider group of stakeholders.

Step 5: Action plan developmentMost of the work will be performed by issue strategy teams concentrating their efforts on a specific subset of issues. With the support of a project manager from the secretariat,

26

each of these teams will conduct its own discussions through conference calls and face-to-face meetings. At the end of this phase, a series of sectoral action plans will be presented to the Executive Committee, the Interdepartmental and Intergovernmental Committee, and to the multi-stakeholder Advisory Committee.

Stakeholder engagement at this stage should not be limited to the internal discussions of each strategy team. Opportunities for public participation should be integrated in the teams’ work plans, for example by consulting members of their respective organizations and by holding online information and discussion forums. They should pay special interest to minority groups that do not have the resources to follow the discussions all along the whole process.

Step 6: Engagement, alignment and integration with U.S. stakeholdersWhile this proposed Collaborative is a Canadian exercise, it will be important to build in a component that reflects on and engages with the U.S. side of the Great Lakes. As the region has a well-developed governance structure through several bi-national and regional agreements, Canada’s process is well-positioned to interact with U.S. federal and state governments, businesses and NGOs, as well as binational bodies like the International Joint Commission and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, all of which are involved in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence region regarding policies, strategies, science, projects, and priorities relating to the protection and promotion of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence environment and economy. Step 7: Collaborative strategy finalizationFollowing finalization of the individual table’s action plans, the Executive Committee and the multi-stakeholder Advisory Committee will work in cooperation and agree on a final vision and blueprint document. The final document, the “Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Regional Collaboration Strategy,” will present a common vision for the future of the region. In addition to specific legislative, programmatic and budgetary recommendations, the strategy will include guiding principles for all governments and stakeholders to guide their actions and investments for the years to come.

3.4 Timing and Draft Budget

The following timetable is proposed for the Collaborative Process:

Timing Activity BudgetJuly – October 2017 Initial stakeholder engagement and stakeholder issue scan.

MITACs to survey/interview stakeholders; Collaborative to circulate Discussion document to stakeholders for feedback, hold 2 roundtables for further stakeholder discussion and feedback.

in-kind

November 2017 Engage Federal Government with scoping document in lead up to, and at GLSL Parliament Hill Day. Seek buy-in from key federal ministers and departments, including Environment and Climate Change Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Transport Canada, Department of Infrastructure and Communities, Small Business, Finance Department, and the PCO and PMO.

in-kind

27

January – February 2018 Secure funding for the process. Create Executive Committee.

January – February 2018 Create secretariat. The secretariat’s first tasks will be to elaborate a final process design.

Director: $100,000 x 1.5 yrs

Assistant: $65,000 x 1.5 yrs 5 Project Managers: $85,000 x 5x 1.5 yrs

Office budget 80,000 x 1.5 yrs

Total: $1MMarch – November 2018 Create and run multi stakeholder advisory committee and

Interdepartmental/Interjurisdictional committeemonthly teleconferencesquarterly face to face meetings

Total: $90,000March – October 2018 Create Issue Strategy Tables

Develop issue strategy plansFour issue strategy teams, with support from a project manager from the secretariat, will conduct discussions through conference calls and face-to-face meetings over a 6-month period (with summer break).

biweekly teleconferencesbi-monthly face to face meetings

$100,000September – October 2018 Engagement with key US decision makers and stakeholdersNovember – December 2018

Finalization of proposed Collaborative Strategy

January 2019 Public Comment on proposed Collaborative Strategy, including summit

$25,000

March 2019 Final Collaborative Strategy released publicly.translation, formatting, printing,

$60,000

TOTAL $1.3-1.5 M

3.5 Resourcing the Blueprint Process and Implementation

The Collaborative will be requesting that the Federal Government provide the $1.3-1.5 M needed to conduct the Collaborative process outlined above. This could come from a number of existing funding programs. Existing federal funding mechanisms will need to be redirected and new and sustained investments will be required to ensure the Blueprint is implemented and specific outcomes and targets met in a timely manner. As occurred under GLRI, this federal funding would be used to leverage provincial, municipal and private and community foundation funding for specific initiatives.

4.0 Discussion Questions

The Collaborative would greatly appreciate your feedback on the following questions. Your feedback to these questions will be incorporated into the next version of this Framework document to be presented to Federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change, the Hon. Catherine McKenna.

28

Please send written answers to these questions to Andrea Paine at the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative, at andrea.paine@glslcities.org.

4.1 Value and Outcomes of Collaborative ProcessA. What value do you see in convening this Collaborative process?B. What value to do you see in your organization’s participation in this process?C. What tangible outcomes do you wish to see from this process?

4.2 Stakeholder EngagementA. How would your organization like to be engaged in this process?B. Is the proposed stakeholder engagement sufficient?C. If not, how can stakeholder engagement in this process be strengthened?

4.3 Proposed PrinciplesA. Do you have any comments on the proposed four guiding principles?

a. Respect and recognition First Nations and Metis peoples in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Region.

b. Strengthen the protection of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River ecosystem.

c. Build adaptive and resilient communities. d. Transition to a sustainable, low carbon, ‘smart’ economy.

4.4 Painting a Picture of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region in 2030A. What is your opinion of the proposed future-oriented direction of the vision and

blueprint (Vision 2030)?B. Does the context piece outlined in this document accurately reflect the trends and

issues at play in the GLSL region? C. What would you add or change to ‘Respect and Recognition of First Nations and

Metis peoples of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Region’?D. What would you add or change to ‘Ecosystem Protection’?E. What would you add or change to ‘Adaptive and Resilient Communities’?F. What would you add or change to ‘Transition to a Low Carbon, ‘Smart’

Economy’?

4.5 Process and ImplementationA. Do you think the proposed process will result in the desired outcomes?B. Specifically, do you have comments on the

i. Process and structureii. Proposed Seven steps

iii. Timelineiv. Process Budget

C. Do you believe the secretariat should be independent of government or embedded in the federal government?

D. Do you have comments on the implementation of the Blueprint and the resources needed for implementation?

29