Five years ago, the world’s nations gathered in Le Bourget, near Paris, to discuss, draft and adopt what has since become known as the Paris Agreement. The document, signed by 196 countries to date, became the first global consensus on the need to address the devastating impacts of climate change. It commits its signatories to containing global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius, a feat that requires tremendous collaboration.
So where are we now, five years down the line?
Some 192 countries around the world, the emitters of 96 percent of the global greenhouse gas emissions, have submitted plans (called nationally determined contributions or NDCs) to reduce their emissions. Meanwhile, as the evidence of the cost of inaction mounts, local governments, businesses and the financial sector are also mobilizing. In less than a year, and despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of net-zero pledges from cities, regions and companies roughly doubled to more than 2,500 by October.
In the second half of 2020 alone, China pledged to go net-zero by 2060 and to put its emissions on a downward trend starting in 2030; the incoming Biden administration vowed to bring the U.S. back to the Paris Agreement; the EU has continued to make progress towards passing its first European Climate Law, which will make climate neutrality by 2050 mandatory across the bloc; and the U.K. government recently vowed to cut emissions by 68 percent by 2030, compared to 1990 levels.
Global trends analysis shows dramatic increases in the production of renewable energy, in particular wind and solar energy, an increased uptake in energy efficiency in buildings and industry, and in the number of electric vehicles; with carbon capture, storage and use, and green hydrogen being touted as the technologies that will help offset the industrial emissions that the other measures cannot tackle.
Applying circular economy strategies for the 5 most common materials in our economy — cement, aluminum, steel, plastics and food — can eliminate almost half of the remaining emissions from the production of goods.
It all sounds positive, but while the groundwork for a net-zero emissions future has been laid, the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continues to increase. Before the government-imposed lockdowns of 2020, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was the highest it had been in over 800,000 years. We already have exceeded the threshold of 1C global warming compared to pre-industrial levels, which has brought about increasingly frequent extreme weather events that are wreaking havoc in communities and ecosystems the world over. Putting the recent climate plans and pledges into action is a matter of utmost urgency.
Importantly, most of these plans and pledges have focused on reducing the emissions from energy, but have largely ignored an important part of the equation: the emissions stemming from the production and consumption of goods and food.
With existing technology, and that expected to be scalable by 2050, an optimal uptake of renewable energy and energy efficiency will address 55 percent of today’s global greenhouse gas emissions — those from energy supply systems, energy consumption in buildings, and transport. The remaining emissions come from the way we make, use and dispose of products, materials and food; they are from industry, agriculture and land use. Certain processes within these sectors are particularly powerful hotspots of greenhouse gas emissions: chemical processes to manufacture cement; high-heat processes such as metal smelting; landfilling; incineration; deforestation; and land use change and agriculture. Tackling this remaining 45 percent of emissions requires a revision of how we design, make and use products and materials, and the way we use land.
The maturity of the conversation around renewable energy and energy efficiency isn’t matched in these other areas — and that is a missed opportunity for governments and businesses alike to address climate change. We need to address all sources of greenhouse gas emissions, which is where the circular economy comes in. Applying circular economy strategies for the five most common materials in our economy — cement, aluminum, steel, plastics and food — can eliminate almost half of the remaining emissions from the production of goods, or 9.3 billion metric tons of CO2e by 2050, equivalent to all current global emissions from transport. The pledges and progress being made at the moment present an opportunity to embed circular economy principles into climate action plans and thus complete the picture.
Before COVID-19, there was a growing consensus that the circular economy was a pathway to long-term prosperity. Rather than pushing the circular economy off the agenda, the pandemic has made it more relevant than ever. By highlighting the fragility of our current system, the pandemic has reinforced the need to rethink our economic model. As well as providing a clear framework to help achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, the circular economy can provide a resilient economic recovery that can work in the long term, unlike any plan entrenched in the take-make-waste principles of the current linear economy. The circular economy can create greater resilience to shocks in industry and society — attributes valuable well beyond the current situation.
Others are thinking along similar lines. The circular economy is on the agendas of some of the world’s largest businesses, including those responsible for 20 percent of the world’s plastic packaging, which have signed the Global Commitment to put in place a circular economy for plastic. Governments around the world are making steps to facilitate the transition through legislation, not least in the EU where the circular economy is a key element of the European Green Deal and a new circular economy action plan has been adopted.
The old ways of doing business — which rely on extraction, waste, pollution and habitat loss — have had their time.
The circular economy offers an attractive path forward as it creates value and growth in ways that benefit customers, businesses, society and the environment. It is a systems solution framework with three principles, driven by design and innovation: eliminate waste and pollution; keep products and materials in use; and regenerate natural systems.
For example, keeping construction materials in use can significantly reduce the climate impact of this sector. The processing of recycled aggregates, for example, generates 40 percent less greenhouse gas emissions than that of virgin aggregates. In the transport sector, multimodal mobility systems, if also designed for durability, reduce global CO2 emissions by 70 percent or 0.4 billion metric tons of CO2 in 2040. In the food system, applying circular economy principles could reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions by 4.3 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalent, comparable to taking nearly all 1 billion cars in the world off the road permanently.
Now could be a crucial moment to embed circular economy principles in government NDCs. Because of the pandemic, the role of governments and public bodies has grown at an unprecedented rate — at least in times of peace. The sheer scale of government spending and the visibility of the state in taking control of many aspects of public life could result in broader public acceptance of government intervention. Coupled with an increased public awareness of the threat of climate change, the result may be governments having both the power and the political will to dramatically shift our global trajectory on climate.
This could mean that international accords such as the Paris Agreement hold more weight than before. Therefore, in order to tackle climate change in a holistic way and act not only on the energy transition and efficiency side, but to look at the whole spectrum of emissions, it is time to put the circular economy at the heart of the efforts to mitigate climate change.
The five-year anniversary of the Paris Climate Agreement couldn’t come at a more pivotal point. With COVID-19 vaccines being rolled out, and nations around the world clamoring to recover from the pandemic’s economic shock, the time is ripe for a system rethink. The old ways of doing business — which rely on extraction, waste, pollution and habitat loss — have had their time. Can the shift to a net zero emission circular economy, which has steadily been building momentum in recent years, be accelerated into a full-blown system overhaul? With the reset button firmly pushed on the global economy, now could be our chance to turn things around, to lay the foundations for a new and better system that can work in the long term.
OTTAWA – Canada’s unemployment rate held steady at 6.5 per cent last month as hiring remained weak across the economy.
Statistics Canada’s labour force survey on Friday said employment rose by a modest 15,000 jobs in October.
Business, building and support services saw the largest gain in employment.
Meanwhile, finance, insurance, real estate, rental and leasing experienced the largest decline.
Many economists see weakness in the job market continuing in the short term, before the Bank of Canada’s interest rate cuts spark a rebound in economic growth next year.
Despite ongoing softness in the labour market, however, strong wage growth has raged on in Canada. Average hourly wages in October grew 4.9 per cent from a year ago, reaching $35.76.
Friday’s report also shed some light on the financial health of households.
According to the agency, 28.8 per cent of Canadians aged 15 or older were living in a household that had difficulty meeting financial needs – like food and housing – in the previous four weeks.
That was down from 33.1 per cent in October 2023 and 35.5 per cent in October 2022, but still above the 20.4 per cent figure recorded in October 2020.
People living in a rented home were more likely to report difficulty meeting financial needs, with nearly four in 10 reporting that was the case.
That compares with just under a quarter of those living in an owned home by a household member.
Immigrants were also more likely to report facing financial strain last month, with about four out of 10 immigrants who landed in the last year doing so.
That compares with about three in 10 more established immigrants and one in four of people born in Canada.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 8, 2024.
The Canadian Institute for Health Information says health-care spending in Canada is projected to reach a new high in 2024.
The annual report released Thursday says total health spending is expected to hit $372 billion, or $9,054 per Canadian.
CIHI’s national analysis predicts expenditures will rise by 5.7 per cent in 2024, compared to 4.5 per cent in 2023 and 1.7 per cent in 2022.
This year’s health spending is estimated to represent 12.4 per cent of Canada’s gross domestic product. Excluding two years of the pandemic, it would be the highest ratio in the country’s history.
While it’s not unusual for health expenditures to outpace economic growth, the report says this could be the case for the next several years due to Canada’s growing population and its aging demographic.
Canada’s per capita spending on health care in 2022 was among the highest in the world, but still less than countries such as the United States and Sweden.
The report notes that the Canadian dental and pharmacare plans could push health-care spending even further as more people who previously couldn’t afford these services start using them.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 7, 2024.
Canadian Press health coverage receives support through a partnership with the Canadian Medical Association. CP is solely responsible for this content.
As Canadians wake up to news that Donald Trump will return to the White House, the president-elect’s protectionist stance is casting a spotlight on what effect his second term will have on Canada-U.S. economic ties.
Some Canadian business leaders have expressed worry over Trump’s promise to introduce a universal 10 per cent tariff on all American imports.
A Canadian Chamber of Commerce report released last month suggested those tariffs would shrink the Canadian economy, resulting in around $30 billion per year in economic costs.
More than 77 per cent of Canadian exports go to the U.S.
Canada’s manufacturing sector faces the biggest risk should Trump push forward on imposing broad tariffs, said Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters president and CEO Dennis Darby. He said the sector is the “most trade-exposed” within Canada.
“It’s in the U.S.’s best interest, it’s in our best interest, but most importantly for consumers across North America, that we’re able to trade goods, materials, ingredients, as we have under the trade agreements,” Darby said in an interview.
“It’s a more complex or complicated outcome than it would have been with the Democrats, but we’ve had to deal with this before and we’re going to do our best to deal with it again.”
American economists have also warned Trump’s plan could cause inflation and possibly a recession, which could have ripple effects in Canada.
It’s consumers who will ultimately feel the burden of any inflationary effect caused by broad tariffs, said Darby.
“A tariff tends to raise costs, and it ultimately raises prices, so that’s something that we have to be prepared for,” he said.
“It could tilt production mandates. A tariff makes goods more expensive, but on the same token, it also will make inputs for the U.S. more expensive.”
A report last month by TD economist Marc Ercolao said research shows a full-scale implementation of Trump’s tariff plan could lead to a near-five per cent reduction in Canadian export volumes to the U.S. by early-2027, relative to current baseline forecasts.
Retaliation by Canada would also increase costs for domestic producers, and push import volumes lower in the process.
“Slowing import activity mitigates some of the negative net trade impact on total GDP enough to avoid a technical recession, but still produces a period of extended stagnation through 2025 and 2026,” Ercolao said.
Since the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement came into effect in 2020, trade between Canada and the U.S. has surged by 46 per cent, according to the Toronto Region Board of Trade.
With that deal is up for review in 2026, Canadian Chamber of Commerce president and CEO Candace Laing said the Canadian government “must collaborate effectively with the Trump administration to preserve and strengthen our bilateral economic partnership.”
“With an impressive $3.6 billion in daily trade, Canada and the United States are each other’s closest international partners. The secure and efficient flow of goods and people across our border … remains essential for the economies of both countries,” she said in a statement.
“By resisting tariffs and trade barriers that will only raise prices and hurt consumers in both countries, Canada and the United States can strengthen resilient cross-border supply chains that enhance our shared economic security.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 6, 2024.
