SCHOOL NEWS
Advancing research to help families, protect the public, and save the planet
W
ith the latest federal government grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) and other backing, faculty are delving into timely legal, political, and philosophical subjects. For other research projects, see Faculty News on pp. 13-15.
According to NASA, 2020 was one of the hottest years ever on Earth. In Canada, nearly half of Nunavut’s super-thick Milne Ice Shelf collapsed into the sea, and changing weather patterns wreaked havoc through hurricanes, wildfires, storms, and flooding. Climate scientists agree the need for action is urgent, but the public, even in Canada, is less convinced. Such is the environment in which Professor Cherie Metcalf, Law’02 (Artsci’90), has once again seen her research and perspective valued. She has received a $97,500 Insight Grant from SSHRC for “Institutions for Effective Climate Change Action,” a four-year interdisciplinary project with a U.S. collaborator, Professor Jonathan Nash of Emory University. A $10,000 grant from the Canadian Foundation for Legal Research followed for her project “Climate Change and Canada’s Constitution,” focused on ways Canada’s constitutional structure influences prospects for effective climate action. For her first project, Metcalf reviews regional and political divisions that have made climate policy-making difficult. “If Canada is to be successful in meeting its ambitious Paris Agreement targets,” she says, “we must think about how best to use different governance strategies to garner public support.” That’s a challenge, she admits, especially with people disputing facts that scientists assure us are not in doubt. “When certain influential private actors adopt policies, does that help engage climate skeptics and political conservatives? Could action by local government as opposed to national government, for instance, broaden the reach? Or possibly using market players?” To answer such questions, Metcalf will look at the ways different institutions – coalitions of large firms, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), national and regional governments, the insurance industry, etc. – influence public reaction to climate change policies. The project will ultimately provide insights into whether a multi-institution strategy can generate the public support that’s essential. To gather a rich body of new data to analyze, Metcalf is using a series of multiple experimental
2 QUEEN’S LAW REPORTS
GREG BLACK
Metcalf explores how institutions can help or hinder effective climate action in Canada
Professor Cherie Metcalf
surveys, each on particular climate risks and policies, and collecting participant responses. Research assistants are helping her with background for the surveys on CanadaU.S. climate laws. Metcalf has already presented a draft paper outlining their research design and preliminary results at seminars and conferences in the U.S. Her second project also incorporates an interdisciplinary approach and data-gathering surveys. Regarding provincial challenges (such as Ontario’s campaign against Ottawa’s cap-and-trade mitigation strategy), she is reviewing legal options for climate action by looking at how Canada’s division of powers may affect popular reaction when new policies and laws are announced. She has an article forthcoming, with a student co-author, that explores the impact federalism has on Canada’s response to both the pandemic and climate change, two existential threats to the country. It also considers how actions at multiple levels of government can complement each other for more effective policy. She is writing a second article examining the recent Supreme Court decision in the constitutional challenge to the federal Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act and its possible implications for future federal vs. provincial authority over climate action, whether mitigation or adaptation.
