Canadian Challenges in Implementing the Kyoto Protocol: A Cause for Harmonization

Authors

  • Elisabeth DeMarco
  • Robert Routliffe
  • Heather Landymore

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29173/alr489

Keywords:

Energy Law, Petroleum Law

Abstract

On 17 December 2002, Canada ratified the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto Protocol), taking on binding targets to reduce Canadian emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Canada's ratification decision and the proposed domestic emissions trading system forming part of Canada's Kyoto implementation plan continue to be the source of considerable disagreement and conflict between the provinces and thefederal government regarding: the practical challenges associated with multiple Canadian jurisdictions implementing emissions trading systems: the current status and legal issues associated with covenants between industry and government(s) to enforce GHG reduction targets; the legal jurisdiction over domestic emissions trading system(s); and the impact on interprovincial and international trade. Each ofthese issues is examined in the unique Canadian legal context. The authors conclude that many ofthe most significant challenges may be mitigated through harmonization and coordination byfederal and provincial governments in a manner that allows for local concerns to be addressed without fragmenting the Canadian emissions markets.

Downloads

Issue

Vol 42, No 1: Petroleum Law Edition

Section

Articles

License

For Editions following and including Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License

For Editions prior to Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.

Author(s) retain original copyright in the substantive content of the titled work, subject to the following rights that are granted indefinitely:

  1. Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to produce, publish, disseminate, and distribute the titled work in electronic format to online database services, including, but not limited to: LexisNexis, QuickLaw, HeinOnline, and EBSCO;
  2. Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to post the titled work on the Alberta Law Review website and/or related websites.
  3. Author(s) agree that the titled work may be used for educational or instructional purposes and/or in educational or instructional materials. The author(s) acknowledge that the titled work is subject to other such "fair dealing" provisions and applicable legislation.
  4. Author(s) grant a limited license to those accessing the titled work from an electronic database or an Alberta Law Review website to download the titled work onto their computer and to print a copy for their own personal, non-commercial use, subject to proper attribution.

To use the journal's content elsewhere, permission must be obtained from the author(s) and the Alberta Law Review.