That's a very good question, and a very difficult solution, as we all know.
Having spent 15 years as an architect in Canada, and at various times having lived and worked in Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, and so on, I understand urban sprawl very well. Our cities are still based on a model developed in the 1950s in Los Angeles. Calgary is one of the very best examples of that. We're still building roads and highways, and, as normal, we happen to be doing that on some of the best agricultural land, not just in Canada but in the world.
I would suggest this goes back to cumulative effects. When you talk about cumulative effects, the key thing in my experience working with Dr. Stelfox is that ultimately you have to put limits on where things go. If you look at Europe, for example, Germany, England, or some of the places that have a much greater population than we do, they have resolved some of that. One of the solutions is the conservation easement solution that we use, which is that we can, through incentives to private landowners, ensure that good agricultural land even close to cities is maintained in agriculture.
I would say that is one of the very best tools. I would like that better, because in a sense it is a market mechanism using incentives rather than regulation, as has sometimes been tried out. I believe Toronto tried a green ring or zone around the city. It has not been that effective.