Annie Chaloux

Green paradiplomacy and water resource management in North America: the case of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin

Sharing the worlds largest freshwater lake system, Canada and United States have for over a hundred years sought to jointly manage this vital resource. However, in accordance with multi-level governance and paradiplomacy literature, it appears that this collaboration has considerably changed over the last thirty years. From an initial bilateral cooperation between federal authorities, provinces and US states became prominent actors in cross-border water governance, and, in this sense, a green transboundary paradiplomacy has emerged along the 49th parallel. In particular, a specific cross-border organization, the Council of Great Lakes Governors, developed an interesting water regime, and adopted recently a dual tool for water governance in 2005, called the “Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River Basin Water Resources Compact” and its non-binding twin the “Great Lakes – St. Lawrence River Basin Sustainable Resources Agreement”, which aim to prevent massive water transfer outside the basin. Adopting a green paradiplomacy and multi-level governance perspective, this article aims to analyze in depth this new environmental regime and the legislative implementation process of this dual agreement. Then, we will begin a broader reflection on cross-border and subnational environmental governance in North America.

Green Paradiplomacy in North America: Successes and Limits of the NEG-ECP

In the 1970s, environmental threats at the international and national levels put the issues of environment and sustainable development at the forefront of the political agenda in North America. From then on, concern about environmental protection has been increasing at every level of government, with regard to several issues, such as acid rain, water quality, forestry, and more recently, the causes and impacts of climate change.

Canada’s Multiple Voices Diplomacy in Climate Change Negotiations: A Focus on Québec

This article sheds light on the complexity of international climate change negotiations in a federal country, like Canada, where there is no clear attribution of full power over international negotiation concerning this issue. Climate change is a multi-level and multi-stakeholder issue, one that can only be tackled successfully if all actors, at all levels of government, are involved in the process. In recent years, Canadian provinces, especially Quebec, have become intensely involved in climate change paradiplomacy. That situation has led to a Canadian paradox where the Government of Quebec worked to respect the Kyoto Protocol and act accordingly, while Canada opted out of the Protocol in 2011.

The Implementation of the Western Climate Initiative: How North American States and Provinces Lead International Climate Negotiations

The Western Climate Initiative is internationally recognized as a success story in global climate negotiations. However, between the first expression of the idea of a cap-and-trade system in 2007 and the launch of carbon trading in 2013, the number of participating Canadian provinces and US states fell from 11 to 2, and important hurdles risked derailing the project completely. The trajectory of this innovative cross-boundary policy holds important lessons for the prospects and pitfalls of green paradiplomacy in North America. This paper examines the impetus for subnational efforts to combat climate change in the face of federal inaction, and, through detailed examination of the WCI , looks at jurisdictional, administrative, legal, political, social and economic factors that complicate the implementation of these initiatives. The analysis enables a better understanding of prospects for the establishment of norms, rules and institutions among North American federated states that can provide durable environmental regimes.

Promesses enterrées: l’évolution de la politique climatique du Canada à l’ère des Conservateurs

En décembre 2011, le Canada devenait le premier pays à se retirer formellement du Protocole de Kyoto. Par ce retrait, le gouvernement canadien tournait la page à plus de deux décennies de négociations multilatérales où le Canada avait pourtant joué un rôle significatif dans l’édification du régime climatique international. Cette évolution rapide pousse nombre dobservateurs à affirmer que le renversement observé dans la politique étrangère se situe avec larrivée des Conservateurs. Mais quen est-il vraiment ? Alors que les émissions de GES ont augmenté de façon continuelle entre 1990 et 2012, peut-on véritablement parler de rupture dans la politique étrangère climatique canadienne avec larrivée au pouvoir des Conservateurs ? Lobjectif de cet article est de présenter cette évolution dans la politique étrangère canadienne entre 1988 et 2012 en offrant une analyse des éléments de continuité et de rupture dans la politique étrangère canadienne à l’égard des changements climatiques au cours de cette période.

États fédérés et mise en œuvre des traités climatiques internationaux : le cas du Québec

La Convention-cadre des Nations Unies sur les changements climatiques (CCNUCC) et le Protocole de Kyoto encadrent les efforts de la communauté internationale en matière de lutte aux changements climatiques. Les gouvernements fédéraux américain et canadien ne sont pas soumis aux dispositions du Protocole, ne l’ayant jamais ratifié ou l’ayant récemment dénoncé, dans le cas plus récent du Canada. Jusquà quel point peut-on affirmer que certains États fédérés nord-américains se substituent à leur État fédéral dans la mise en œuvre, sur leur territoire, des obligations contenues à la Convention-cadre et au Protocole de Kyoto? Le présent article évalue le degré et la nature de cette éventuelle substitution en analysant un premier cas, celui du Québec. Les auteurs concluent que cet État, de façon autonome, se conforme à la plupart des obligations climatiques internationales telles que visées à la Convention et au Protocole, à lexception notable, pour le moment, dun niveau de soutien significatif en faveur des pays en développement. L’étude de ce cas confirme l’importance des acteurs subétatiques face aux grands défis internationaux contemporains, dans un contexte de gouvernance à paliers multiples.