DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY of ALBERTA
POL S 470A2 Fall 2014
ISSUES IN ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS AND POLICY1
Tuesday 14:00-16:50 HC 4-78
Laurie E. Adkin, Assoc. Professor
H. M. Tory Bldg. 12-27
Tel. 492-0958 email: ladkin@ualberta.ca
Office hours: Thursday 1:30-3:30 or by appointment
COURSE PREREQUISITES: Pol S 230 or 240, or consent of instructor. Pol S 333 strongly
recommended.
COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course examines the institutions, actors, and political-economic interests,
and cultural values that shape environmental policy in Canada. Students review approaches to explaining
environmental policy that have different ontological and normative starting points, and learn to identify these
starting points. Throughout the course we ask what environmental policy and policy-making tell us about the
nature of democracy and citizenship, more broadly, in the Canadian context. Readings are multi-disciplinary,
reflecting the various kinds of knowledge that come into play in studying environmental questions. Topics
include: regulation of toxic chemicals; fisheries and oceans; biodiversity and species at risk; biotechnology;
land-use conflicts; energy conflicts; climate change. Participants in the seminar will have an opportunity to
deepen their knowledge of a specific area of environmental policy through conducting independent research.
This course is designed with senior undergraduate students in mind who have some background in political
economy and who may have taken courses in comparative politics, Canadian politics, environmental
sociology, or interdisciplinary programs such as gender studies or environmental studies. Pol S 470 A2 is
cross-listed with Pol S 540 A1 (Topics in Public Policy).
COURSE GOALS: The aims of the course include:
 Becoming familiar with the general characteristics of environmental policy in Canada, as well as the
variety of policy tools used by governments at municipal, provincial, and federal levels.
 Learning to identify the different theoretical approaches taken to explaining the roots and the nature of
environmental problems, and to proposing solutions.
 Developing awareness of the various roles played by scientific and other types of knowledge in policy
debates and policy formulation.
 Deepening understanding of the actors, interests, resources, institutions, and relationships that determine
the policy responses to environmental problems.
 Honing research, analytical, and writing skills through seminar preparation and participation, and the
completion of a research project.
 Developing a deeper understanding of ecological citizenship at individual and collective levels.
1
Policy about course outlines, grading and related matters can be found in Section 23.4(2) of the
University Calendar.
1
CLASS FORMAT: POL S 470/540 is designed as a seminar course. Roundtables, presentations, or class
exercizes may be used to achieve learning goals and allow evaluation of participation. Students are
encouraged to share insights from their research projects as well as from other experience (work, recreation,
volunteer activity, involvement in social movements) that help to interpret and assess the course readings.
Two class periods at the end of term will be devoted to research presentations.
COURSE TEXTS: The following books have been ordered for the Campus Bookstore in the Students’
Union Bldg. Other readings are available electronically (using your U of A library account) or on the
course website.
Laurie E. Adkin, Ed. Environmental Conflict and Democracy in Canada. Vancouver: University of British
Columbia Press, 2009. [required]
Laurie E. Adkin, Politics of Sustainable Development: Citizens, Unions, and the Corporations. Montreal;
New York; London: Black Rose Books, 1998. [required]
Christopher Gore and Peter Stoett, Eds., Environmental Challenges and Opportunities: Local–Global
Perspectives on Canadian Issues. Toronto: Emond Montgomery Pubs., 2008. [required]
Debora L. VanNijnatten and Robert Boardman, Eds., Canadian Environmental Policy and Politics:
Prospects for Leadership and Innovation, 3rd ed. Toronto: Oxford University Press, 2010. [required]
Boyd, David R. Unnatural Law. Vancouver: UBC Press. [recommended]
COURSE WEBSITE: http://pols470.pbworks.com/ To access the website, type in your University of
Alberta email address and a password. The website contains recommended readings and other resources
intended to enrich your learning in this course and to help you to investigate research topics. The website is
continually updated by the instructor, so you should check it frequently during the term. In addition to new
resources, posted to topics and country pages, announcements concerning the course will be posted on the
front page. Notice of upcoming talks, conferences, films, or other events of interest to political science
students will be posted on the Events page. If you have notices that you would like to share with the class,
please email them to the instructor.
Course-based Ethics Approval in place regarding all research projects that involve human testing,
questionnaires, etc? No, not needed. No such projects approved.
Community Service Learning component N/A
Past or Representative Evaluative Course Material Available through the Exam Registry
Students’ Union http://www.su.ualberta.ca/services/infolink/exam/ Not applicable.
Additional mandatory Instructional fees (approved by Board of Governors) No
GRADE DISTRIBUTION
The course requirements are outlined below. Students should note that in all but exceptional situations, all
components of the course must be completed to receive a passing grade. In addition to the assigned readings,
students are responsible for all curriculum covered in the lecture periods. Policy regarding missed term work
is outlined in Section 23.4(3) of the University Calendar. Tests and assignments will be assigned a letter
grade. The instructor will not ‘curve’ or adjust final grades according to any preset formula.
Attendance, Absences, and Missed Grade Components:
Regular attendance is essential for optimal performance in any course. In cases of potentially excusable
absences due to illness or domestic affliction, notify your instructor by e-mail within two days. Regarding
2
absences that may be excusable and procedures for addressing course components missed as a result, consult
sections 23.3(1) and 23.5.6 of the University Calendar. Be aware that unexcused absences will result in
partial or total loss of the grade for the “attendance and participation” component(s) of a course, as well as
for any assignments that are not handed-in or completed as a result.
Seminar Participation (total 35 per cent of grade)
(1) General participation (attendance, evidence of having read the material and prepared responses to the
questions, ability to use terms and concepts from the readings, and constructive engagement in the group
discussion or exercizes). [20 per cent]
(2) Seminar presentation (preparation, organization, knowledge of readings, analytical insight, oral
presentation skills) [15 per cent] [Dates: Sept 30- Nov 18]
Written Assignments (total 65 per cent of grade)
(1) Research Proposal due September 30 [10 per cent]
(2) Write-up of your seminar presentation (maximum 8 pages) due the week following your presentation
[20 per cent]
(3) Research essay (12-15 pages) on a topic of your choice, but related to an environmental policy question.
See the detailed instructions for the assignments are provided further on in this syllabus. Due no later than
December 8. [35 per cent]
There is no final exam in this course.
GRADING SCHEME FOR UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS:
Descriptor
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Letter Grade
A+
A
AB+
B
BC+
C
CD+
D
F
Grade Point
4.0
4.0
3.7
3.3
3.0
2.7
2.3
2.0
1.7
1.3
1.0
0
LATE PENALTIES, PLAGIARISM & ACADEMIC
HONESTY
Late assignments: It is your responsibility to inform the
instructor as soon as it becomes clear that your work
will be late. If you do not communicate in
advance, and your reason for being late does not also
explain this lack of communication, then you should be prepared to be penalized 0.2 (out of 4.0) per day. Extensions
will be granted in the case of illness or personal crisis. An extension for an assignment due at the end of the term may
result in a grade of incomplete, due to grade submission deadlines in December. Please note that, beyond certain limits,
extensions may only be granted by the Faculty of Arts and under specified, medically documented conditions.
Poor
Minimal Pass
Failure
LEARNING AND WORKING ENVIRONMENT
The Faculty of Arts is committed to ensuring that all students, faculty and staff are able to work and study in
an environment that is safe and free from discrimination and harassment. It does not tolerate behaviour that undermines
that environment. The department urges anyone who feels that this policy is being violated to:
• Discuss the matter with the person whose behaviour is causing concern; or
• If that discussion is unsatisfactory, or there is concern that direct discussion is inappropriate or threatening, discuss it
with the Chair of the Department.
For additional advice or assistance regarding this policy you may contact the student ombudservice:
(http://www.ombudservice.ualberta.ca/ ). Information about the University of Alberta Discrimination and Harassment
3
Policy and Procedures is described in UAPPOL at
https://policiesonline.ualberta.ca/PoliciesProcedures/Pages/DispPol.aspx?PID=110 .
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY: “The University of Alberta is committed to the highest standards of academic integrity
and honesty. Students are expected to be familiar with these standards regarding academic honesty and to uphold the
policies of the University in this respect. Students are particularly urged to familiarize themselves with the provisions
of the Code of Student Behaviour
(http://www.governance.ualberta.ca/en/CodesofConductandResidenceCommunityStandards/CodeofStudentBehaviour.aspx ) and
avoid any behaviour that could potentially result in suspicions of cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation of facts
and/or participation in an offence. Academic dishonesty is a serious offence and can result in suspension or expulsion
from the University.”
ACADEMIC HONESTY: All students should consult the information provided by the Office of Judicial Affairs
regarding avoiding cheating and plagiarism in particular and academic dishonesty in general (see the Academic
Integrity Undergraduate Handbook and Information for Students). If in doubt about what is permitted in this class, ask
the instructor. An instructor or coordinator who is convinced that a student has handed in work that he or she could not
possibly reproduce without outside assistance is obliged, out of consideration of fairness to other students, to report the
case to the Associate Dean of the Faculty. See the Academic Discipline Process .
AUDIO OR VIDEO RECORDING OF LECTURES, labs, seminars or any other teaching environment by
students is allowed only with the prior written consent of the instructor or as a part of an approved accommodation
plan. Recorded material is to be used solely for personal study, and is not to be used or distributed for any other
purpose without prior written consent from the instructor.
USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES IN CLASS: Laptop computers may be used for taking or reading notes or when
making presentations. The use of laptops for note-taking is not recommended, both because research shows that this is
less useful for you than hand-writing, and because laptops interfere with personal interaction in the classroom. Use of
laptops for other purposes is not permitted. Use of i/smart/cell phones or other electronic devices in class is not
permitted.
SPECIALIZED SUPPORT & DISABILITY SERVICES: If you have special needs that could affect your
performance in this class, please let me know during the first week of the term so that appropriate arrangements can be
made. If you are not already registered with Specialized Support & Disability Services, contact their office
immediately ( 2-800 SUB; Email ssdsrec@ualberta.ca; Email; phone 780-492-3381; WEB www.ssds.ualberta.ca ).
FEELING OVERWHELMED? (In need of student, social, financial or security services?):
The Students’ Union Peer Support Centre is there to listen, offer support, supply information and provide services:
 Call: 492-HELP (492-4357)
 Drop in: 2-707 in the Students’ Union Building
 Visit: http://www.su.ualberta.ca/services/psc/ Email: psc@su.ualberta.ca
COURSE SCHEDULE
Week One Sept 9 Introduction(s)
Course questions:
What is “policy”?
What/who shapes environmental policy in Canada?
What needs to be changed? How?
What is ecological citizenship?
4
Recommended overviews of Canadian environmental politics:
Laurie Adkin, “Environmental Movement in Canada,” in Timothy Doyle and Sherilyn MacGregor, eds.,
Environmental Movements around the World: Shades of Green in Politics and Culture, Volume 1
(Praeger Pubs., 2014): 131-162.
David R. Boyd, Unnatural Law: Rethinking Canadian Environmental Law and Policy (UBC Press, 2003).
Robert Paehlke, “The Environmental Movement in Canada,” in VanNijnatten and Boardman (2009): 2-13.
Week Two Sept 16 Identifying theoretical approaches and concepts
Each of your text books presents a particular framework for understanding environmental policy
“issues,” “debates,” or “conflicts.” Can you identify the broad outlines of these frameworks, and the ways in
which they differ from one another? Use the questions below to characterize each framework on the basis of
the introductory chapters. (Use the same questions to “debone” each of the subsequent readings in the
course.) Highlight any significant terms or concepts used by the authors, and note their definitions.
(1) What ontological framework does the author use in identifying the roots of environmental crises, or the
failures of environmental policies? For example, does the author use concepts from ecological science
(e.g., ecosystem, habitat, carrying capacity)? Are biophysical limits to human consumption of planetary
resources or economic growth acknowledged? (Are terms like ecological footprint, earth overshoot, or
limits to growth used?) What is his/her understanding of the political-economic context within which
environmental conflicts take place? (Liberal? Social Democratic? Marxist? Feminist? Post-Marxist?)
Does the author recognize the existence of any profound societal conflicts? Or does he/she recognize only
“problems” or “shortcomings” in existing institutions or in the existing economy that minor reforms,
more education, better communication, more enlightened politicians, or better-organized bureaucracies,
for example, would resolve? (What would “sustainable development” mean to this author?)
(2) Who does the author think the important actors are in the making of environmental policies? Which
ones are privileged, and why? Are any left out of the picture? How would their inclusion alter the
analysis?
(3) Upon which level of analysis does the study focus? Political-legal institutions (constitution, legislation,
electoral system, party system, federal system, bureaucracy, executive branch, parliament, judiciary)?
Individual behavior or human nature? Collective action (social movements, NGOs)? Political
leadership? The economic system? What reasons do the authors give for their particular choices? Do
they recognize the connections, or relationships, among these levels of analysis? If so, how do they
represent these relationships? Are certain levels considered to be more determinate of outcomes than
others?
(4) To what extent does the analyst take into account the multi-scalar nature of environmental conflicts?
How does the treatment of scale (the dynamic interplay of the local, regional, national, global) influence
the usefulness of the analysis that the author produces?
(5) Does the analysis demonstrate awareness of questions regarding knowledge, i.e., different kinds of
knowledge and their claims to legitimacy; the roles of different types of knowledge or knowers in
environmental policy conflicts?
(6) What sense do you get of the author(s)’s normative leanings? Are they made explicit or do you need to
derive them from the ontological framework and the identification of the problem and what is at stake in
its resolution or non-resolution? Why does this author think that the problem that he or she is studying
5
is important? To whom? Another clue to an author’s normative orientation and ontological assumptions
is the criteria that s/he uses to assess the adequacy or success of a policy. For example, does s/he ask
only “Does the policy do what the government intended it to do?” Or, does s/he ask: “Is this policy
just?” “Does this policy advance ecological sustainability?” (Is the author concerned only with
“environmental” effects, or are questions of social justice also asked? Is the focus mainly on the
availability of resources and ecosystem services (e.g., clean air and water, trees, energy) for humans, or
does a “deeper” view of “nature” (as having intrinsic value, autonomy, rights, or spiritual significance
for humans) underpin the author’s evaluation of the policy? Is the author working from an unreflectively
anthropocentric perspective?
(7) Taking into account all of the above, how adequately do you think the author diagnoses the problem?
How adequate are the solutions? What explains the shortcomings? What does this analysis contribute to
our understanding of the problem?
Readings
Laurie Adkin, “Preface” and “Ecology, Citizenship, Democracy” (Ch. 1), in Adkin, ed., pp. xi-xiii, 1-15.
Peter Stoett and Christopher Gore, “Introducing the Global-Local Dimension” (ch. 1), in Gore and Stoett,
eds., pp. 1-12.
Deborah L. VanNijnatten and Robert Boardman, “Introduction,” in VanNijnatten and Boardman, eds., pp. ixxxvii.
Recommended
Randolph Haluza-DeLay, Pat O’Riley, Peter Cole, and Julian Agyeman, “Speaking for Ourselves, Speaking
Together: Environmental Justice in Canada,” in Julian Agyeman et al., eds., Speaking for Ourselves:
Environmental Justice in Canada (UBC Press, 2009), pp. 1-26.
Week Three Sept 23 Nuts and Bolts of Environmental Policy in Canada
What do these overviews of the tools, resources, and decision-making processes of environmental policy
help us to understand about the kind of policies we have today, or about the necessary conditions for
changing environmental policies?
Readings
Mark Winfield, “Policy Instruments in Canadian Environmental Policy Leadership” (ch. 4), in VanNijnatten
and Boardman, eds., pp. 46-63.
Stephen Bocking, “Defining Effective Science for Canadian Environmental Policy Leadership”
(ch. 5), in VanNijnatten and Boardman, eds., pp. 64-76.
Laurie Adkin, “Democracy from the Trenches: Environmental Conflicts and Ecological Citizenship” (ch.
18), in Adkin, ed., pp. 298-318.
Recommended
Chapters 3, 6, 7, 9, 10 in VanNijnatten and Boardman, eds.
Chapters 7, 11 in Adkin, ed. [for discussion of science and environmental policy]
Ch. 7 in Gore and Stoett, eds. [municipal jurisdictions]
Chapters 2, 5, 6 in Edward A. Parson, ed., Governing the Environment: Persistent Challenges, Uncertain
Innovations (University of Toronto Press, 2001).
David R. Boyd, Unnatural Law: Rethinking Canadian Environmental Law and Policy (UBC Press, 2003).
David R. Boyd, “No Taps, No Toilets: First Nations and the Constitutional Right to Water in Canada.”
Report for Ecojustice, 2011, http://www.ecojustice.ca/files/first-nations-right-to-water/view?searchterm=Boyd.
Kathryn Harrison, Passing the Buck: Federalism and Canadian Environmental Policy (UBC Press, 1996).
6
CASE STUDIES / SEMINAR PRESENTATIONS
RECAP: Questions to ask about the readings
1. What questions about the issue/problem does each author address? How is the problem framed? What
does the question assume about the nature of politics? (See the more detailed list of questions under
Week Two.)
2. How do the questions asked/not asked direct the subsequent analysis (theoretical approach) of the
author? What evidence is looked for?
3. What argument is made about the problem at hand? What does this analysis (approach) contribute to
our understanding of the causes and solutions in regard to this problem?
4. Are any questions not addressed by this set of readings?
5. Are there disagreements among these analyses concerning causes and solutions? From what kinds of
assumptions about the nature of politics do these disagreements stem?
Week Four Sept 30 Regulation of Toxic Chemicals
Readings:
Kathleen Cooper and Loren Vanderlinden, “Pollution, Chemicals, and Children’s Health: The Need for
Precautionary Policy in Canada” (ch. 8), in Gore and Stoett, eds., pp. 183-224.
Sarah B. Pralle, “Reform, Not Revolution: Pesticides Regulation in Canada” (ch. 17), in VanNijnatten and
Boardman, eds., pp. 252-266.
Laurie E. Adkin, Politics of Sustainable Development: Citizens, Unions, and the Corporations (Montreal;
New York; London: Black Rose Books, 1998), Part II.
Recommended:
Kellyn S. Betts, “Unwelcome Guest: PBDEs in Indoor Dust,” Environmental Health Perspectives vol. 116,
no. 5 (May 2008): A202–A208. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2367657/ (2008).
Canadian Partnership for Children’s Health and Environment (NGO):
http://www.healthyenvironmentforkids.ca/content/about-us.
Chapters 15, 16 in VanNijnatten and Boardman, eds.
Chapter 5, 9 in Gore and Stoett, eds.
John Eyles, “Population Health, Environmental Justice, and the Distribution of Diseases: Ideas and Practices
from Canada” (ch. 7), in Agyeman et al., eds., pp. 123-143.
Sarah Fleisher Trainor et al, “Environmental injustice in the Canadian Far North: Persistent organic
pollutants and Arctic Climate impacts,” in Agyeman et al., eds., pp. 144-162.
Elizabeth M. Kinney, “Children's environmental health: a comparison of risk assessment approaches taken
by Canada, the United States and the European Union,” LLM Diss., Faculty of Law, University of British
Columbia, 2009, https://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/17447.
Week Five Oct 7 Fisheries and Oceans
Readings
Donna Harrison, “Modern Enclosure: Salmon Aquaculture and First Nations Resistance in British Columbia”
(ch. 4), in Adkin ed., pp. 51-68.
John Volpe and Karena Shaw, “Fish Farms and Neoliberalism: Salmon Aquaculture in British Columbia”
(ch. 6), in Gore and Stoett, eds., 131-158.
One recommended reading of your choice.
7
Recommended:
Martha Stiegman, “Fisheries privatization versus community-based management in Nova Scotia: Emerging
alliances between First Nations and non-native fishers,” in Adkin ed., pp. 69-83.
Martin Krkošek et al., “Declining Wild Salmon Populations in Relation to Parasites from Farm Salmon,”
Science vol. 318 no. 5857 (14 December 2007): 1772-1775.
D. Martineau et al., “Pathology and toxicology of beluga whales from the St. Lawrence Estuary, Quebec,
Canada. Past, present and future,” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 154, Issues 2-3 (16 September
1994): 201-215.
Joseph G. Vos et al., eds. Toxicology of Marine Mammals (New York: Taylor & Francis, 2003). [Includes a
study of the effects of oil spills on marine mammals.]
Jef Huisman et al. “Reduced mixing generates oscillations and chaos in the oceanic deep chlorophyll
maximum,” Nature (international weekly journal of science) vol. 439, issue 7074 (January 19, 2006):
322-325, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v439/n7074/full/nature04245.html.
Olive Heffernan, “Souring Seas,” Nature Climate Change (February 18, 2010),
http://www.nature.com/climate/index.html.
Scott Doney, “Oceanography: Plankton in a warmer world,” Nature 444, issue 7120 (7 December 2006):
695-696, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7120/full/444695a.html.
Daniel A. Siegel & Bryan A. Franz, “Oceanography: Century of phytoplankton change,” Nature vol. 466,
issue 7306 (29 July 2010), http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7306/full/466569a.html.
Week 6 Oct 14 Biodiversity and Species at Risk
Readings:
Stephen Bocking, “Making Space for Species: Local and Global Challenges of Biodiversity” (ch. 2), in Gore
and Stoett, eds., pp. 13-42.
Stewart Elgie, “The Politics of Extinction: The Birth of Canada’s Species at Risk Act” (ch. 14), in
VanNijnatten and Boardman, eds., pp. 197-215.
Jessica Dempsey, “The Politics of Nature in British Columbia’s Great Bear Rainforest,” Geoforum vol. 42,
issue 2 (March 2011): 211-221. [access electronically or download from website]
Recommended:
Eric B. Taylor and Susan Pinkus, “The effects of lead agency, nongovernmental organizations, and recovery
team membership on the identification of critical habitat for species at risk: insights from the Canadian
experience,” Environmental Review vol. 21 (April 2013): 93-102.
Robert Boardman, “Polar Bears and the Canadian Arctic: Local Communities in a Globalizing World” (ch.
12), in Gore and Stoett, eds., pp. 305-326.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) Report, October 2011,
http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/eng/sct0/rpt/rpt_csar_e.pdf.
Convention on Biological Diversity (homepage): http://www.cbd.int/.
Convention on Biological Diversity Alliance (ENGO) homepage: http://www.cbdalliance.org/mandate/.
Rosemary-Claire Collard and Jessica Dempsey, “Life for sale? The politics of lively commodities,”
Environment and Planning A vol. 45 (2013): 2682-2699.
Jessica Dempsey, “Charting a Post-2010 Decade of Solidarity,” [square brackets] (CBD Newsletter for Civil
Society) Issue 4 (October 2010),
http://69.90.183.227/ngo/square-brackets/square-brackets-2010-10-en.pdf.
8
Week Seven Oct 21 Regulation of Biotechnology
Readings:
Shane Mulligan, “Canada and the Gene Revolution in Agricultural Biotechnology” (ch. 4), in Gore and
Stoett, eds., pp. 43-70.
Peter Andrée and Lucy Sharratt, “Unsatisfactory Democracy: Conflict over Monsanto’s Genetically
Engineered Wheat” (ch. 2), in Adkin, ed., pp. 16-32.
One recommended or other reading of your choice. [This could be a news report on GMO regulation. Please
provide to the class before the session.]
Recommended:
Canadian Biotechnology Action Network: http://www.cban.ca/.
Peter Andrée, “Civil society and the political economy of GMO failures in Canada: a neo-Gramscian
analysis,” Environmental Politics vol. 20, issue 2 (2011): 173-191.
Peter Andrée, Genetically Modified Diplomacy: The Global Politics of Agricultural Biotechnology and the
Environment (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2007).
Week Eight Oct 28 Land-use Conflicts
Readings:
Patricia Ballamingie, “First Nations, ENGOs, and Ontario’s Lands for Life Consultation Process”
(ch. 6), in Adkin, ed., pp. 84-102.
Colette Fluet and Naomi Krogman, “The Limits of Integrated Resource Management in Alberta for
Aboriginal and Environmental Groups: The Northern East Slopes Sustainable Resource and
Environmental Management Strategy” (ch. 8), in Adkin, ed., pp. 123-139.
Gerda R. Wekerle, L. Anders Sandberg, and Liette Gilbert, “Taking a Stand in Exurbia: Environmental
Movements to Preserve Nature and Resist Sprawl” (ch. 17), in Adkin, ed., pp. 279-297.
Recommended:
Government of Alberta Land-use Framework: https://landuse.alberta.ca/Pages/default.aspx.
Arielle Dylan, Bartholemew Smallboy & Ernie Lightman, “’Saying No to Resource Development is
Not an Option’: Economic Development in Moose Cree First Nation,” Journal of Canadian Studies vol.
47 no. 1 (Winter 2013): 59-90.
Week Nine Nov 4 Energy Conflicts and Public Participation in Policy-Making
Philip S. Elder, “The Participatory Environment in Alberta,” Alberta Law Review vol. 12 (1974): 403-430.
Evan Bowness and Mark Hudson, “Sand in the cogs? Power and public participation in the Alberta tar
sands,” Environmental Politics vol. 23, no. 1 (2014): 59-76.
George Hoberg and Jeffrey Phillips, “Playing defence: early responses to conflict expansion in the oil sands
policy subsystem,” Canadian Journal of Political Science vol. 44, no. 3 (September 2011): 507-527.
Wendy J. Palen et al., « Consider the global impacts of oil pipelines, » Nature vol. 510 (June 2014): 465-467.
Recommended:
Debra J. Davidson and Mike Gismondi, Challenging Legitimacy at the Precipice of Energy Calamity (New
York: Springer Press, 2011).
Robert MacNeil, “Canadian environmental policy under Conservative majority rule,” Environmental Politics
vol. 23, no. 1 (2014): 174-178.
Geoffrey H. Salomons and George Hoberg, “Setting boundaries of participation in environmental impact
assessment,” Environmental Impact Assessment Review vol. 45 (2014): 69-75.
9
George Hoberg, “The battle over oil sands access to tidewater: A political risk analysis of pipeline
alternatives,” Canadian Public Policy vol. 39, no. 3 (2013): 371-391.
Week Ten Nov 11 NO CLASSES
Week Eleven Nov 18 Climate Change
Readings:
Robert Paehlke, “Global Politics Comes to Fort McMurray: Energy and Climate Change in Canada” (ch. 12),
in Gore and Stoett, eds., pp. 283-304.
Douglas Macdonald, “The Failure of Canadian Climate Change Policy: Veto Power, Absent Leadership, and
Institutional Weakness” (ch. 11), in VanNijnatten and Boardman, eds., pp. 152-166.
Karena Shaw, “Climate deadlocks: the environmental politics of energy systems,” Environmental Politics
vol. 20, issue 5 (2011): 743-763. [access electronically]
Camille Fertel et al., “Canadian energy and climate policies: a SWOT analysis in search of federal/provincial
coherence,” Energy Policy vol. 63 (2013): 1139-1150.
Recommended:
Chapter 10 in Gore and Stoett, eds.
Chapter 12 in VanNijnatten and Boardman, eds.
Environment Canada, “A Climate Change Plan for the Purposes of the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act,”
May 2011, http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/Content/4/0/4/4044AEA7-3ED0-4897-A73ED11C62D954FD/COM1410_KPIA%202011_e%20-%20May%2031%20v2.pdf.
Pembina Institute, Climate Change webpage: http://www.pembina.org/climate.
Kathryn Harrison, “Federalism and Climate Policy Innovation: A Critical Reassessment,” Canadian Public
Policy vol. 39, no. 2 (2013): S95-S108.
Week Twelve Nov 25 Research Presentations
Week Thirteen Dec 2 Research Presentations
Research Papers due no later than December 8
Seminar Presentation/Leadership
You will be responsible for presenting one of the environmental policy case studies to the group. Depending
on the size of the class, there may be more than one presenter per topic. As you will see from this paragraph,
you have a lot of leeway to use this time in different ways. You should, however, “debone” the required
readings, using the questions provided on this syllabus. In addition, use at least two additional sources.
These may be chosen from the recommended readings, or you may find sources from your own research. Try
to get a sense of the civil society actors engaged in this issue. (For some of the case studies, website links to
such organizations are provided under the “recommended” sources.) In addition to the course readings, you
may use video clips, power-point slides, or other resources. If you think the class would benefit from
watching a longer video on the topic, please talk to the instructor in advance. If you are the sole presenter,
plan to take about 30 minutes to set out your analysis of the readings and issues related to this area of
environmental policy. Identify some questions for the class discussion. (You will take the lead in
encouraging debate and answering questions.) If you wish to have the class do an exercise of some kind,
information or questions may be emailed to seminar participants before the class session. Again, please
consult with the instructor regarding your plans.
10
Research Project Proposal (text 700-800 words)
You do not have to follow this 3-point format for your proposal, but you should be sure to cover all of the
requirements described in the following points.
(1) Describe your case study (or studies) and explain why you have chosen it (them). What do you find
interesting about this phenomenon? (See below for examples of topics.) What questions does it generate?
What will you be able to explain once you have completed your research? Identify the theoretical and
empirical questions or debate to which you aim to contribute.
(2) Explain why the particular case you have selected will allow you to shed light on the more general
problem or question identified in (1). If you have selected more than one case, explain the rationale for your
choices. (You may need some help with comparative research design if you have not taken Pol S 230 or
240—or even if you have!)
(3) Outline the kind of research you expect to do and have already undertaken. Explain how these methods
will produce the kind of data or information you need to answer the questions set out in (1).
(4) Provide references for any sources you cite.
(5) Identify the documentation style that you will be using for your endnotes or footnotes and your references
or bibliography.
Research Paper (text 12-15 pp. plus bibliography or list of references)
Your research project does not have to be on one of the topics covered in the course. (There are many
current environmental conflicts and areas of policy that we are not able to cover.) However, do consult the
instructor before finalizing a topic.
Your key task is to formulate a researchable question about an ongoing conflict, policy or approval
process, legislative initiative or review, or policy debate. The question needs to be very clearly stated. So, for
example, you need to go a step beyond a statement like: “I want to write about the conflict over the Northern
Gateway Pipeline proposal.” What, more precisely, do you want to ask about this conflict? How the
approval process is structured and how this process design is likely to shape the outcomes? Why the federal
government is supporting the project? How the First Nations communities along the route are mobilizing to
oppose the pipeline and what obstacles they confront?
You might choose a more historical question, e.g., How is nuclear energy regulated in Canada and who
are the actors involved in shaping this regulatory regime? What role have business organizations played in
determining Canada’s policy on climate change? What happened in the last parliamentary review of the
Canadian Environmental Protection Act and why?
Or, you might formulate a comparative question, e.g., Why have two countries with similar economies
and reliance upon oil exports--Norway and Canada—adopted very different responses to climate change and
the imperatives of “sustainable development”? Why has the Government of Canada not adopted the same
fuel emission standards as the United States? Why does Canada have a different regulatory approach to
GMOs (or PBDEs) than the European Union?
You could focus on a local phenomenon, like the factors explaining the adoption by Edmonton City
Council of The Way We Green, and how these factors explain the content (achievable consensus) embodied
by this document. Or, you could examine policy at provincial or federal levels. You might undertake a
“multiscalar” analysis of something like opposition to Alberta’s bituminous sands development.
The introduction to your paper should cover the three points outlined for the research proposal (above). In
examining the published analyses of your topic by academics, as well as other sources (NGOs, think tanks,
scientists, etc.), keep in mind the questions outlined at the beginning of this syllabus. Try to identify where
these analyses are “coming from,” theoretically and ideologically—how they frame the issue, and so on. You
have limited space to analyze something that will necessarily be very complex, so keep your core question
11
front-and-centre in the analysis. It is important to develop a concise, coherent argument supported by
evidence.
As this is a research essay, the quality of your research will be a substantial component in the evaluation
of your work. Get started on this early; consult the librarians at Rutherford and/or Cameron libraries about
databases or other sources that you should investigate. Search for relevant scholarly publications in journals
or books. If your topic is current, you may need to rely mainly on documentation or interviews (primary
sources), but will still need a theoretical framework – hence a scholarly literature – in which to situate your
analysis. For a major research project of this nature, undertaken by senior undergraduate students, I will
expect a solid bibliography that includes at least 20 sources. At least ten of these should be scholarly
sources. You may use internet publications, but these should be correctly cited (so that sources may be
relocated by other researchers). You should also provide the date on which you accessed the publication
online. For detailed instructions on citing electronic sources, consult your style manual.
If you have questions about your research, please talk to me.
Your essay should be type-written and double-spaced, with font no smaller than this (12 pt). The pages
should have one-inch margins. Make sure your pages are numbered. Endnote, footnote, or referencing
styles are all acceptable, but you must choose and use only ONE. (References are preferred.)
Provide the complete reference for the style manual used on the title page of your essay. (Do not include
the manual reference in your bibliography or list of references.) Failure to use a style manual or to
proofread your essay for grammatical errors, as well as inadequate research, will negatively affect
your grade. Note that the Arts Faculty requires instructors to “take into consideration the quality of
expression [in] assessing the written work of students and to refuse to accept work that is markedly deficient
in the mechanics of composition.”
These are the main criteria by which an essay is evaluated.
Does the essay demonstrate a good understanding of the problem under investigation, and of the
arguments which have been advanced by the authors whose work addresses this problem?
Does the essay demonstrate an ability to develop a coherent position, or argument, regarding the question
or problem at hand? This may take the form of critical review of the arguments presented in a particular
literature. An outstanding paper will offer some original insights regarding the theoretical problem or
question addressed, and will give evidence of careful research.
Does the essay demonstrate good writing skills? These include: a coherent structure and presentation of
material, clarity of expression, excellent grammar, spelling, and correct use of sources. Of course,
creativity is greatly encouraged!
Does the essay demonstrate sufficient research to locate sources which are relevant, important, and
reasonably up-to-date? Has a thorough search been made of periodicals indexes for scholarly journals and
other databases related to the area of research? Is there an overly-heavy reliance on only one or two
sources, rather than a wide sampling of different perspectives on the subject which have then been
subjected to critical examination?
Documentation and Writing
You must use an accepted essay-writing manual for the social sciences. The Chicago Manual of Style
(CMS) is preferred, but APA is also acceptable. The CMS may be accessed online
(http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html), or, you may purchase a style manual from a bookstore.
12
The Turabian et al. manual (see below) provides general guidelines for writing essays, in addition to the style
formats for bibliographies, endnotes, and so on.
Turabian, Kate, Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb, and Joseph M. Williams. 2007. A Manual for
Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations. Seventh Edition: Chicago Style for Students and
Researchers. University of Chicago Press.
There are good reasons for using correct, standard styles for punctuation and documentation in your
essay; these include clarity and accuracy in identifying the sources of any factual statements or claims
you make, and ready comprehension of your writing by the readers. A major problem area is the use of
quotations; consult a style guide for the correct practices. Whether you use a referencing style, footnotes,
or endnotes, learn an accepted documentation style and use it consistently. The same rule applies for your
bibliography or list of references.
Many common practices such as paraphrasing or failing to clearly identify the source of arguments used
in an essay border on plagiarism and should be avoided. If you have any doubts concerning the correct
way to use or to credit sources, the correct use of footnotes, and so on, please consult your writer's
manual. If you still have questions, talk to your instructor.
It is perfectly acceptable to write in the first person.
 When using references in your paper, make sure that it is evident to your reader why you are citing a
particular source at the end of a sentence. To do this, identify the source of your data or of the argument
or interpretation in the sentence itself. Here’s an example.
Do not write:
The February 2010 White Paper revealed a significant shift in government policy toward the
regulation of gold mining (Smith 2006, 12).
[This sentence implies that this is your opinion, based on your reading of the document, and so it is
confusing to the reader to see another author cited at the end of the sentence. If, in fact, you are
reporting someone else’s interpretation of the meaning of the document, state this clearly.]
Write:
In the view of Margaret Smith (2006, 12), an environmental lawyer at CELA, the February 2010
White Paper revealed a significant shift in government policy toward the regulation of gold mining.
[In this example, you see that the reader is also given some information about the expertise or
background of the person whose interpretation you are reporting; this helps the reader to assess the
significance of the opinion. Always introduce your sources in this way when you first refer to them. We
generally state the full name of the source, too, the first time we cite that source, but not subsequently.]
Please note the resources offered by the University of Alberta’s Centre for Writers:
http://www.c4w.arts.ualberta.ca/
13
EXCERPTS FROM THE CODE OF STUDENT BEHAVIOUR
(UPDATED EFFECTIVE APRIL, 2008)
30.3.2(1) Plagiarism
No Student shall submit the words, ideas,
images or data of another person as the
Student’s own in any academic writing,
essay, thesis, project, assignment,
presentation or poster in a course or
program of study.
30.3.2(2) Cheating
30.3.2(2) a No Student shall in the course
of an examination or other similar
activity, obtain or attempt to obtain
information from another Student or
other unauthorized source, give or
attempt to give information to another
Student, or use, attempt to use or
possess for the purposes of use any
unauthorized material.
30.3.2(2) b No Student shall represent or
attempt to represent him or herself as
another or have or attempt to have
himself or herself represented by another
in the taking of an examination,
preparation of a paper or other similar
activity. See also misrepresentation in
30.3.6 (4).
30.3.2(2) c No Student shall represent
another’s substantial editorial or
compositional assistance on an
assignment as the Student’s own work.
30.3.2(2) d No Student shall submit in any
course or program of study, without the
written approval of the course Instructor,
all or a substantial portion of any
academic writing, essay, thesis, research
report, project, assignment, presentation
or poster for which credit has previously
been obtained by the Student or which
has been or is being submitted by the
Student in another course or program of
study in the University or elsewhere.
30.3.2(2) e No Student shall submit in any
course or program of study any academic
writing, essay, thesis, report, project,
assignment, presentation or poster
containing a statement of fact known by
the Student to be false or a reference to a
source the Student knows to contain
fabricated claims (unless acknowledged by
the Student), or a fabricated reference to a
source.
30.3.6(4) Misrepresentation of Facts
No Student shall misrepresent pertinent facts to
any member of the University community
for the purpose of obtaining academic or
other advantage. See also 30.3.2(2) b, c, d
and e.
30.3.6(5) Participation in an Offence
No Student shall counsel or encourage or
knowingly aid or assist, directly or
indirectly, another person in the
commission of any offence under this Code.
The Truth In Education (T*I*E) project is a
campus wide educational campaign on Academic
Honesty. This program was created to let people
know the limits and consequences of
inappropriate academic behavior. There are
helpful tips for Instructors and Students.
Please take the time to visit the website at:
http://www.ualberta.ca/tie
14