Posted with permission of the publisher of NRU Publishing Inc. Original article first appeared in Novae Res Urbis GTHA, Vol. 28, No. 15, Wednesday, April 9, 2025.

As Canadians head to the polls later this month for the 2025 federal election, environmental organizations are urging election candidates to prioritize ecological and climate-change-related policies in their platforms, warning that losing sight of long-term environmental goals in a rush to address urgent economic priorities could be disastrous for Canada in the long run.

Last week Nature Canada released the Nature Platform, a plan designed to encourage the federal government to safeguard Canada’s natural resources, which the organization says is critical to maintaining Canada’s national identity and mitigating the effects of climate change.

“With only 23 per cent of our land habitats and 13 per cent of our oceans remaining intact, urgent action is required to halt nature’s decline,” reads a statement accompanying the platform’s release.

The platform outlines three commitments Nature Canada believes the next federal government should adopt. The first is to commit to protecting 30 per cent of the country’s land and water by 2030, an initiative that should include safeguarding old-growth forests, providing long-term funding for Indigenous land steward programs, and protecting wildlife.

In 2022, the Liberal government did commit to protecting 30 per cent of the country’s land and water, also known as the “30 x 30” target. Nature Canada director of policy and campaigns Akaash Maharaj, however, notes that the government has not met its interim target of protecting 25 per cent of the country’s land and water by 2025, and says the incoming government will need to fulfill that promise, which will only be possible by “accelerating its efforts.”

The second pillar of the Nature Platform calls for the government to restore 30 per cent of land and waters degraded by industrial practices by 2030, and allot $1 billion per year in nature-based funding over the next five years.

The platform’s third pillar encourages the next government to facilitate equitable access to nature for all Canadians by establishing a permanent Office of Environmental Justice and expanding urban green spaces. This will address the issue of “asymmetrically-distributed” greenspace across cities, which tends to leave lower-income urban communities with limited access to nature or green infrastructure, Maharaj tells NRU.

To achieve the three pillars in Nature Canada’s platform, the federal government will need to collaborate closely with provincial governments, which govern approximately two thirds of Canada’s land, says Maharaj. He believes the 2022 ‘30 x 30’ pledge was initiated with good intentions, but that the federal government “wildly underestimated” the complexity of negotiating these protective measures with the Provinces.

“There’s no way to protect nature in Canada without partnerships between federal and provincial governments, and those are fraught in the best of times,” says Maharaj. “We hope that while people are disagreeing about the needs of protecting nature and priorities, that the core idea that our country is better off when it is protected is not one that’s subject to active debate. I think most people agree with that, that a living ecosystem is better than a dead ecosystem.”

While Canada’s natural spaces—its lakes, oceans, mountains and forests—have always been central to the country’s national identity, protecting these resources is also critical to helping mitigate the effects of climate change. Tree canopies shield cities from the urban heat island effect, help sequester carbon and protect structures from extreme storms or the effects of flooding, for example.

Maharaj worries that amid a period of acute economic anxiety, governments might be tempted to think about immediate economic relief actions and put less emphasis on longer-term priorities, such as land protection or climate change initiatives. “It [a focus on economic health at the expense of environmental protection] might work in the short-term, but it’s disastrous in the long-term,” he warns.

Though Maharaj says Nature Canada’s platform was released primarily to encourage debate during the ongoing federal election campaign, it also comes shortly after Parks Canada released budget documents indicating it would implement $14.1 billion in budget cuts over the next five years, as well as eliminate 800 full-time positions. Parks Canada says the cuts would come primarily from “internal efficiencies,” which would not be noticeable to most Canadians, but the revised budget still sparked debate amongst environmental organizations about whether the federal government can still meet its ecological priorities while cutting funding to some of its long-term program streams (See: “Making Sense of Cut Dollars,’ NRU GTHA, Wednesday, April 2, 2025).

In a statement to NRU, Parks Canada said that its budget is updated as necessary. “Planning numbers are updated as decisions are made over time, which is necessary as the Agency receives a substantial amount of time-limited funding,” said the statement. “At Parks Canada, each location administers its operations according to local circumstances and may adjust its activities and associated investment to strategically align with field unit priorities, including long-term sustainability, providing the most efficient use of taxpayers’ money, and ensuring a safe, high-quality visitor experience”

Amid the pending federal election, economic uncertainty and competing land use priorities, Nature Canada isn’t the only organization to encourage federal candidates to take a long, hard look at the role climate policies could play in strengthening the economy. Last month, The Atmospheric Fund (TAF) released a series of policy recommendations of its own, urging federal candidates to prioritize strategies that decarbonize the building sector, accelerate adoption of low-carbon transportation, and take steps to embrace renewable energy generation.

Nature Canada’s Maharaj believes that responding to recommendations like those in the Nature Platform or in TAF’s report will take political will and pressure from communities themselves.

“Although I think there’s a significant consensus in Canada that nature is important to us and it’s part of our national identity, nature can’t speak for itself,” he says.