Plan20-50: Global Frameworks Embedded in Canadian Municipalities
Plan20-50: Global Frameworks Embedded in Canadian Municipalities
Plan20-50: Global Frameworks Embedded in Canadian Municipalities
Prepared for: Canadian Municipal Council Review
Date: October 24, 2024
By: Margaret Hope Braun, KICLEI Canada
Disclaimer: All of the initiatives discussed in this report, including Plan20-50 and its counterparts across Canada, are being brought in through recommendation of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) in partnership with the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) via the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program. While this program is voluntary, it places all liability for the implementation of these initiatives on local councils, not on the FCM, ICLEI, or the Canadian government. Municipalities are therefore solely responsible for any legal, financial, or operational burdens arising from these global frameworks. This report encourages Canadian municipalities to reconsider their participation in the PCP program and prioritize locally driven solutions. Withdrawing from the program will allow local councils to retain control over their governance and protect their communities from the potential negative impacts associated with these global sustainability goals.
Executive Summary
This report examines the impact of the Official Plans for 2050, designed to align local governance with global sustainability goals, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs). The 2050 Official Plans promote initiatives such as urban densification, complete communities, and the adoption of smart city technologies. The emphasis on global frameworks, such as net-zero emissions targets and the circular economy, often places financial and logistical burdens on smaller communities, requiring extensive data collection and infrastructure upgrades that are costly to maintain.
Moreover, these plans encourage the involvement of global investors to fund local development projects, which raises concerns about corporate influence over local governance and economic dependency on external entities. Municipalities risk losing control over their own development strategies as they align more closely with global agendas.
The report recommends that Canadian municipalities reconsider their participation in the PCP Program and prioritize locally driven solutions that align with the specific needs of their communities. Withdrawing from the program would allow councils to retain governance control and avoid the financial and legal liabilities tied to these global initiatives. Additionally, the report emphasizes the need for tailored approaches that address the unique economic, environmental, and cultural challenges of rural and suburban areas, ensuring that sustainability goals are met without compromising local autonomy.
Extensive Data Collection: Energy and Waste Tracking
A key component of global sustainability frameworks like Plan20-50 is the extensive data collection required to monitor energy use and waste management across both community and corporate sectors. Similar requirements appear in initiatives such as Energy Cities Framework and Circular Resource Plans. This data, critical for tracking progress toward sustainability goals like net-zero emissions and circular economies, imposes high financial costs on municipalities. Implementing infrastructure for real-time monitoring—such as smart meters, sensors, and data-reporting systems—requires significant taxpayer funding. The ongoing maintenance, analysis, and staffing needs further strain municipal budgets, diverting resources from critical services. In addition to financial burdens, this continuous data collection raises privacy concerns, especially with personal and corporate data being managed by third-party entities. Cybersecurity risks are heightened as well, with data breaches exposing both private information and critical infrastructure vulnerabilities. Municipalities, especially smaller ones, may also lack the capacity to process this data effectively, forcing them to rely on costly external consultants.
Urban Densification
Urban densification is central to Plan20-50 and similar initiatives, such as Urban Growth Boundaries and Compact City Models, across various regions. While this strategy aims to alleviate housing shortages, it overlooks the specific challenges faced by rural and suburban areas, where housing affordability is the key issue rather than urban sprawl. High-density housing developments, though effective in urban centers, do not align with the cultural and geographical preferences of non-urban communities that value single-family homes and larger properties. These frameworks risk transforming the character of rural areas, overloading infrastructure, and reducing green spaces. Furthermore, increased densification can lead to traffic congestion, gentrification, and the displacement of low-income families, eroding the social fabric of affected communities. A more tailored approach that addresses the unique needs of different regions is crucial to ensuring sustainable growth without sacrificing local character and livability.
Complete Communities and the Role of Global Investors
Under frameworks like Plan20-50 and others such as Resilient Cities and 15 Minute Cities, the concept of "complete communities" is promoted. These communities are designed to ensure that residents can live, work, and access essential services within close proximity. While ideal for urban centers, this model is often impractical for rural and suburban areas where residents rely on private vehicles for long commutes to jobs and services. Imposing a city-centric model in these regions can disrupt local economies and fail to meet residents' needs. Additionally, the push to attract global investors for funding infrastructure and development projects is a growing concern. In the past, global investment in small towns has led to the displacement of local businesses, increased dependence on foreign capital, and a shift in focus from community-driven development to profit-driven motives. This approach risks turning municipalities into economic hubs controlled by multinational corporations, marginalizing local businesses and reducing economic resilience. Ensuring that local economies retain autonomy and that development is driven by local needs rather than external financial interests is critical.
Smart City Technology
Smart city technologies—such as sensor-based data collection, real-time monitoring systems, and interconnected infrastructure—are embedded within frameworks like Plan20-50, as well as Smart Growth Plans and Future Cities Strategies. While such technologies can improve the efficiency of urban services like traffic management and energy use, their relevance for rural and suburban areas is limited. The costs associated with implementing these technologies, including installation, maintenance, and data management, are high and may outweigh the benefits in less populated regions. Moreover, the continuous data collection inherent in smart city technologies raises significant privacy and cybersecurity concerns. Residents may view the monitoring of their movements and behaviors with distrust, particularly if the data is managed by private corporations with minimal transparency. These risks, combined with the financial burden, call for a cautious approach to adopting smart technologies in areas where they provide limited practical advantages.
Active Transportation
Plan20-50, like many other frameworks such as Sustainable Mobility Initiatives and Green Transport Programs, emphasizes active transportation modes like walking and biking as sustainable alternatives to vehicle use. While these initiatives work well in urban centers, where services are concentrated and distances are short, they are often impractical in rural and suburban regions, where residents must travel longer distances for work, healthcare, and daily services. These areas rely heavily on private vehicles, and imposing policies that discourage vehicle use could place undue burdens on residents. Additionally, rural infrastructure is often not equipped to support active transportation, and retrofitting roads for pedestrian or bicycle traffic could result in high costs with limited returns. The harsh Canadian climate further complicates these policies, as winter conditions render walking and biking impractical for a significant portion of the year. A more balanced transportation strategy that acknowledges the need for vehicle use in rural areas is necessary.
Electric Vehicles: Cost, Safety, and Ethical Concerns
Plan20-50, along with other initiatives like Zero-Emission Vehicle Strategies and Green Fleet Policies, strongly promotes the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) as part of sustainability goals. However, EVs present significant challenges, especially in rural areas where long-distance travel, cold weather, and rough terrain make traditional vehicles more practical. The high upfront cost of EVs, coupled with the lack of charging infrastructure in remote areas, limits their accessibility. Safety concerns also arise, particularly regarding the potential for battery fires, which pose a greater risk in regions with slower emergency response times. Furthermore, the ethical issues associated with the mining of materials for EV batteries, such as lithium and cobalt, raise environmental and labor exploitation concerns. While EVs align with global climate objectives, they do not address the specific transportation needs and challenges faced by rural and suburban communities.
Circular Economy
The circular economy model, promoted through Plan20-50 and similar frameworks like Zero Waste Cities and Sustainable Resource Management Plans, advocates for advanced waste management systems such as automated recycling, waste-to-energy technologies, and carbon capture. While these technologies may reduce waste in urban areas, they impose significant financial and logistical challenges on smaller municipalities. Many rural communities already manage waste effectively through community-driven, low-cost solutions, and the implementation of high-tech systems may offer minimal improvements while increasing operational costs. Moreover, the extensive data collection required to monitor and report on these systems further raises privacy and financial concerns, as it places additional burdens on municipal budgets and residents' personal information. A focus on local, cost-effective waste management practices is necessary to ensure that rural municipalities are not forced into adopting expensive technologies that provide little benefit.
Climate Resilience and Net-Zero Goals
Climate resilience and net-zero emissions targets are central to Plan20-50, as well as initiatives like Climate Action Plans and Low-Carbon Transition Strategies. While addressing climate resilience through infrastructure upgrades and disaster preparedness is essential, the focus on achieving net-zero emissions may be impractical for regions like Manitoba, which contribute minimally to global emissions. Transitioning to renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, can be costly and challenging, particularly in cold climates where these technologies are less reliable. In many rural areas, the cost of renewable energy infrastructure may outweigh the benefits, diverting resources from more pressing needs like infrastructure repairs and social services. Instead, municipalities should prioritize practical resilience measures, such as flood protection and improving water management systems, that directly benefit local communities without imposing unrealistic global emissions targets.
Global Investors and Local Governance
Similar to Plan20-50, frameworks like Global Green Investments and Sustainable Infrastructure Partnerships increasingly rely on global investors to fund large-scale infrastructure projects. While external capital may provide financial support for development, it raises significant concerns about corporate influence over local governance. Investors may prioritize profit-driven projects that do not align with local needs or values, leading to decisions that benefit external entities rather than the community. Furthermore, a lack of transparency regarding the terms of these investments can erode public trust, as residents are left uncertain about how these deals will impact their daily lives. Over-reliance on global investors also risks making municipalities financially dependent on external entities, reducing their ability to govern independently. It is crucial for municipalities to maintain local control over key infrastructure projects and ensure that global investors do not compromise local autonomy or undermine community-driven decision-making.
Conclusion
Global frameworks like Plan20-50 and their regional counterparts, embed global sustainability goals that may not always align with the needs of Canadian municipalities, particularly in rural and suburban areas. From urban densification and smart technologies to electric vehicles and global investment, these frameworks introduce financial burdens, privacy concerns, and governance challenges that must be carefully weighed. Canadian municipalities are encouraged to reconsider their involvement in the PCP program and prioritize locally driven solutions that address their unique realities while maintaining control over their governance and development decisions.
Recommendations
Withdraw from the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) Program: Reclaim local control and avoid being held solely liable for the financial and legal implications of implementing these global frameworks.
Assess the Necessity of Data Collection Programs: Weigh the costs and privacy risks of data collection on energy and waste tracking to ensure clear benefits for the community.
Resist One-Size-Fits-All Densification Policies: Prioritize housing solutions that reflect local preferences, particularly in rural and suburban areas.
Limit the Influence of Global Investors: Ensure that local businesses and residents maintain control over economic development to foster resilience.
Evaluate the Need for Smart City Technologies: Prioritize privacy and security while ensuring that technological adoption provides clear benefits.
Adopt a Balanced Transportation Strategy: Recognize the essential role of private vehicles in rural and suburban life, and plan infrastructure accordingly.
Ensure Affordable and Practical Transportation Options: Weigh the financial, safety, and ethical implications of promoting EVs, particularly in non-urban areas.
Focus on Cost-Effective Waste Management Solutions: Avoid expensive technological upgrades where simpler, community-driven practices suffice.
Prioritize Practical Climate Resilience: Focus on infrastructure upgrades and disaster preparedness over global emissions targets that may offer little local benefit.
Maintain Transparency and Local Control in Investor Relationships: Ensure that global investors do not dominate decision-making or compromise local priorities.
“Global frameworks like Plan20-50 and their regional counterparts, embed global sustainability goals that may not always align with the needs of Canadian municipalities” They DEFINITELY do not align with our needs!!! This is the goal of the WEF…to lock us all down and monitor our every move etc…”you will own nothing and be happy”! Control control control.
Do NOT comply.
Thank you for your hard work. I have downloaded this report.