I have been interested in environmental issues since the early 1970s. My interest in urban environmental issues began in 1988.
I have organized my remarks based on the issues this committee is considering. I will therefore speak to them one at a time. Let us begin with urban conservation.
Generally speaking, urban conservation deals with the protection and conservation of urban biodiversity. The concept of biodiversity applies at both the species level and the ecosystem level. A broad interpretation of urban conservation would also include issues related to the rehabilitation of ecosystems that have deteriorated.
According to an all too common perception, biodiversity mainly occurs outside urban areas. All you find in cities are transformed, deteriorated and urbanized ecosystems. Yet, many ecosystems zones still exist. They have a significant ecological value and they display the characteristics of those natural ecosystems before their urbanization.
In urban areas, it is also important to strike a balance between ecosystem conservation and the use of ecosystems for recreational purposes. That balance has to be based on ecological principles and enhanced by making these natural areas accessible and making the public aware of environmental issues. In fact, the natural characteristics of several of these areas can evolve over time. They are still just as valuable.
I will now talk about urban conservation goals.
Species and ecosystems, and even some natural or semi-natural landscapes located in urban areas, have intrinsic value. From a long-term perspective, their conservation can allow current and future generations to develop harmonious cohabitation with nature in cities. The Aichi-Nagoya Declaration on local authorities and biological diversity emphasizes public awareness, especially with regard to youth, of the value of biological diversity.
For approximately 15 years, researchers have been interested in the notion of ecological services provided by ecosystems and they are attempting to assess those services in monetary terms. In urban areas, natural and semi-natural ecosystems also contribute to air quality improvement, carbon capture, mitigation of urban hot spots, runoff stabilization, landscape improvement, and public health and wellness.
Other urban biodiversity conservation goals should include things such as land use planning, limiting urban spread, and dealing with concerns related to conservation in general.
You asked about best practices in Canada in this area. First, I would like to mention that the ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability published a series of studies in 2010 on best practices in Canadian cities for local biodiversity management. I will simply mention the cities that these studies focused on: Kelowna, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Greater Sudbury, Guelph, Toronto, Montreal, Trois-Rivières, Wolfville and the Deh Cho First Nations.
At the international level, UNESCO, under its man and the biosphere program, jointly developed with Concordia University the concept of an urban biosphere reserve. Several cities belonging to international local authorities networks come together on a regular basis and discuss urban biodiversity conservation issues.
In Quebec, there are some interesting examples of urban biodiversity conservation. Non-governmental or university organizations have often had a role in these examples. In Montreal, for example, Friends of the Mountain monitor conservation in Mount Royal Park on a regular basis. The Parc de la Rivière-des-Mille-Îles includes a series of areas that are organized and managed by a not-for-profit organization. In the mont Saint-Grégoire, paths are maintained by another not-for-profit organization. McGill University owns the mont Saint-Hilaire Nature Centre which is available to the public.
NGO participation in urban biodiversity conservation is therefore essential. There are several organizations in Quebec such as the Sentier Urbain, the Société de verdissement du Montréal urbain, Vivre en Ville, the Centre d'écologie urbaine de Montréal, and others.
In Quebec, there is also a network of environmental regional councils that brings together all the organizations that play an active role in this area and engage in a regional dialogue on environmental conservation.
At the regional level, the Communauté métropolitaine de Montréal recently adopted their Plan métropolitain d'aménagement et de développement (Metropolitan Development Plan). One of the major objectives of this plan, in cooperation with regional environmental groups, is to protect and improve the environment.
Now I would like to briefly speak about the main challenges. First of all, this field calls on a multitude of stakeholders and several levels of governance. What we call multiscalar articulation is therefore a significant challenge. Secondly, provincial and federal departments, municipal services and academic institutions were essentially designed on the basis of questions, concerns and sectors such as health, the economy, the environment and so on.
It has become clear that a sectoral and fragmented approach is no longer sufficient to tackle multisectoral problems that are extremely complex. Conserving biodiversity in an urban setting requires integrated and ecosystem-based approaches. Our current structure is far from facilitating the implementation of such approaches.
Furthermore, municipalities are often confronted with having to choose between conserving the ecological wealth of a certain area, or developing a real estate project that would generate income through property taxes. In Quebec, this is a major stumbling block because municipalities receive most of their revenue from property taxes.
Lastly, there are other challenges when civil society participates in the conservation of urban biodiversity, especially where public consultation is concerned because often it comes too late in the decision-making process.
As for the advantages, urban conservation contributes to maintaining global biodiversity and ecosystems that the health and well-being of urban populations depend on.
The economic aspects were highlighted earlier when discussing the concept of ecological services. Moreover, a large scale program could be designed to restore urban ecosystems that would generate wealth and likely be advantageous to the economy and society.
To make sure I don't run out of time, I'm going to go straight to the role that the federal government can play in urban conservation. The federal government has some wonderful resources that could contribute to such an effort. Take for example Environment Canada, Parks Canada, Statistics Canada, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, and so on.
In the 1990s, Environment Canada carried out a number of studies and publications on the development of a set of national environmental indicators and on the state of the environment reports, which are still very useful. However an update on these publications would be appreciated. The work done by the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy could also be useful, particularly their work on biodiversity, the fight against climate change and soil decontamination.
Over the years, Canada has made a number of commitments on the international level, several of which have an impact on the conservation of biodiversity in an urban setting. It might be a good idea to be updated on these commitments and understand how they are implemented.
When developing a future national conservation plan, Canada must ensure that it maintains its national sovereignty over environmental legislation. It should also review and consolidate its environmental legislation and regulations when necessary, as well as their enforcement. This would suggest that a high level of scientific expertise be maintained within the government.
There are many challenges. We're talking about renewed leadership, federal inter-agency coordination, an innovative approach, multiscalar articulation, adequate funding and maintaining existing resources. Consulting less recent publications could also be relevant.
Finally, the Government of Canada endowed the Federation of Canadian Municipalities with $550 million to create the Green Municipal Fund. This fund offers funding for plans, studies and capital investment projects. On the face of it, a municipal project for biodiversity conservation in an urban setting would not be admissible in this framework. Perhaps it would be the appropriate time to review the program rules or design a new one that would specifically focus on conservation and restoration of biodiversity in urban settings.
This kind of program could potentially create jobs and significant economic benefits.
In conclusion, there are multiple, significant and complex issues. About 100 years ago, in 1909, the Government of Canada created the Commission of Conservation. A review of the commission's work shows an understanding of sustainable development in Canada before it became recognized. This is decades before the Brundtland Commission, which developed the same notion years later. The Government of Canada abolished the Commission of Conservation in 1921 for unknown reasons. How would things be today if it had been maintained?
Thank you.