12 minute read
TURNING ENERGY VS. CLIMATE INTO ENERGY AND CLIMATE IN A POLARIZED WORLD
OPINION
Turning Energy vs. Climate into Energy AND Climate in a Polarized World
Advertisement
BY DAVID L. MILIA, PRESIDENT & CEO, CANADIAN ENERGY & CLIMATE NEXUS
WHAT POLARIZATION IS, AND HOW IT DISPLAYS ITSELF IN CANADA
Are you polarized when it comes to looking at energy development and climate change? If you answered no, ask yourself if any of the following statements resonate with you:
• We need to transition away from fossil fuels towards renewable energy
• The world is addicted to fossil fuels, and while that is still the case, the best option is Canadian fossil fuels
• Scientists agree that we are in the 6 th mass extinction event of life on earth
• Climate Change is just a myth
• That “boomer” generation is short-sighted and has no notion of the terrible legacy they are leaving to future generations
• Nothing is predictable or forecastable, so better not to do anything
Figure 1: Angus Reid (iii)
If one or more resonate with you, there is a strong probability you have been exposed to information, factual or compelling, and have now adopted that ideation. Unfortunately, the complexity that surrounds balancing energy development and the challenges associated with climate change is too significant to allow for just one approach. The result? An environment where divergence towards being “right” has negated the ability to collaboratively tackle complexity and instead perpetuates polarized views amongst Canadians.
Before continuing, let’s take a step back; what exactly is polarization? The Oxford dictionary defines polarization as: “The division into two sharply contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs.” There was a time when many required this definition, but today there are few who have not seen polarization in action or are not active participants in a polarized position on a myriad of topics.
Naturally, polarization has evolved throughout the discussion of the future role of various energy ecosystems and how they relate to Climate Change. The clearest example of this in the public spectrum revolves around what the future energy mix should be comprised of, either fossil fuels or renewable energy sources, and creates positions pushing one option or the other rather than both. Given both positions have factual support that exemplifies their inherent advantages, proponents of each can point to truthful examples of why one is superior. A study conducted in 2019, just before a federal election in Canada, demonstrated that most Canadians placed a high value on renewable development. The same study also showed Canadians were more divided on the importance of oil and gas in the future, but most believed that this sector played a vital role in Canada’s economy. Not surprisingly, when another federal election was called two years later, climate change remained as one of three most important topics, as can be seen in Figure 1.
Suppose the assumption can be made that most Canadians enjoy energy security, that climate change needs to be addressed, and that we currently don’t have a fully functional replacement for fossil fuels. In that case, it seems likely that polarization will continue. Based on a study conducted by The University of California at Berkeley, there is mounting evidence from our neighbours to the south that polarization has a tangible negative cost should the same conditions be replicated in Canada. This study delimited 14 negative consequences to increased polarization, some which are notably alarming, such as how it affects the family unit, how it makes us less likely to help one another, how it impacts our personal health, how it leads to violence, but most importantly, how it makes problems harder to solve even when there is agreement in place. Put all this into context, and it becomes clear why our progress on energy and climate change, although significant, is suffering.
Astro-turfing: the next great import from the United States
As the world technologically advances in big data, artificial intelligence (AI) and the internet of things (IoT), sophisticated digital tools have also evolved to exploit public opinion and manipulate or influence political outcomes. An example of this brought to light can be seen via the Cambridge Analytica Files piece done by The Guardian commencing in 2018 , where a link was made between social media and a group using such tools to manipulate political outcomes. Yet more concerning than this is the rise of what is now commonly known as “Astro-turfing,” which is: “The deceptive practice of presenting an orchestrated marketing or public relations campaign in the guise of unsolicited comments from members of the public.” It is no coincidence that Astro-turfing was born in the early 2000s with the rise of the millennial generation, social media, and the popularization of issues such as climate change and industrial regulation. This transition led to the establishment of multiple political lobbying pushes masquerading as grassroots efforts. There are examples of such groups on both sides of Canada’s energy/ climate change narrative, most notably seen through political campaigns. In politics, as in polarized topics, the evidence points to negativity being the driver in successfully pulling individuals into “camps.” This emotional draw may occur because the average individual has no interest in, nor has conducted research on, topics that can be simplified into a polarized position. If a polarized position is presented in a manner that incites fear or enrages the target audience, its outcome generally leads that audience into a polarized camp. When that message comes from what is perceived as a “grassroots” group, its influence increases, particularly where no obvious link exists between the party pushing for a specific outcome and the grassroots group created to push for it. This practice has become so commonplace, that when any link of potential Astro-turfing exists, it too makes the headlines and becomes a point for public polarization via media stories. One such recent example can be seen via the financial support given to the Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL) and the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR) using donations received from Mark Zuckerberg in the amount of $419M which was alluded to be linked to Democratic results in the 2020 United States Election.
Canada’s great resource and climate leadership potential
So, what exactly is at stake if polarization continues? Quite a lot as it turns out, as Canada currently provides about 4% of the worlds total primary energy production and ranks in the top 10 amongst various energy industries, shown by The Canadian Factbook in Figure 2.
Figure 2: The Canadian Factbook (XI)
Although we technically export energy to over 141 countries, when over 90% of those exports are earmarked for our neighbours to the south, it can be argued we are entirely dependant on the United States for much of the economic benefit of Canada’s current energy plays.
Given Canada is the second largest country in the world by land area and has a disproportionate amount of the world’s natural resources, it has a toolkit of options at its disposal as steward of those resources. Furthermore, there is a largely untapped opportunity to authentically engage the Indigenous peoples of Canada who have a long-lasting legacy of having an intricate, respectful, and protective relationship with Canada’s natural environment .
Figure 3: Government of Canada (XIII)
Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions projections when linked to federal reduction targets demonstrate a weakening relationship between economic and emission growth. Where although emissions are projected to decrease by 9% between 2005 and 2030, GDP is projected to increase by 54% over the same period. Projections by the Federal Government vary when comparing what they describe as “with current measures” with two alternative projections when different economic and energy pricing alternatives are put into place. Regardless of projection, to date, Canada is falling short of the 2020 and 2030 targets they have set for themselves as shown in Figure 3.
Breaking Polarization via Shared Values
Ongoing research conducted by The Canadian Energy and Climate Nexus in partnership with Dr. Lianne Lefsrud from the University of Alberta and others, indicates that emotions are likely to trump any type of data driven push when it is aimed at the overall public. These studies indicate that human judgement can be mostly estimated by applying computational models into two key emotions-based dimensions:
1. Valence: Whether a thing is good or bad (pleasure/ displeasure)
2. Arousal: How good or bad a thing is and its likelihood of motivating action
When applied to the various polarized narratives on energy and climate change, a clear picture emerges of where emotional parameters - not always being tied to facts, capabilities, or reality - often can influence action. It is important to note again, that these dimensions are linked to the public and not to an employee-based organization where a technical expert, academic expert, or those who share technical views are the most credible sources of information. This concept is exemplified by research put forward via the 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer, shown in Figure 4. One potential avenue to breaking polarization lies within the application of shared values. These values transcend where in Canada we live and what energy industry we believe is best suited to tackle the energy and climate challenges of the future.
Figure 4: Edelman Trust Barometer, 2019 Annual Global Study (XV)
Harvard’s Dr. Michael Porter described the challenge we face today in the following manner:
“Capitalism is suffering from a crisis of trust. Today’s businesses take the blame for many of society’s economic, social, and environmental woes, despite the launch of countless corporate social responsibility initiatives in recent decades. Now more than ever—amid a global economic crisis that has strained the capacity of governments and NGOs to address complex societal challenges—it is time to restore public trust through a redefined vision of capitalism with the full potential to meet social needs.”
Based on this, one potential solution to the energy and climate change challenges that Canada faces can potentially be addressed by consciously stepping over polarization to find common ground represented by one unifying shared value . That value will need to include economic drivers, value for society by addressing its needs and challenges, and addressing environmental and climate change imperatives . Today, this drive is commonly parked under Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) initiatives that incorporate many Post- Brundtland Commission sustainability-based imperatives. One methodology to developing balanced ESG approaches gaining international support is “dynamic materiality” developed by Truvalue Labs (TVL). This approach recognizes the role of materiality in corporate reporting, how it is in a constant state of flux, and how it influences decision-making. As it pertains to the oil and gas sector, applying ESG norms to their business isbecoming increasingly critical given the current investment atmosphere. BNN Bloomberg demonstrated this recently by comparing current $80 a barrel pricing to the last time such prices were the norm in 2014. Concluding that although barrel pricing is the same as in 2014, company stock valuations are currently 26% lower then they were in 2014. The reason? Back in 2014 there were fewer ESG institutional constraints from the market.
Conclusion - Your Role
So, what can we take away from all of this? Hopefully not just that we are becoming more entrenched and divisive, or that polarization can have strong negative consequences. As a CHOA stakeholder there is a high probability that in reading this you have a strong technical expertise from the industry you are a part of but have your considered the following:
• Are you able to consider the views of others when not linked to some form of empirical data that makes their proposition “right”?
• Are you aware that you too are governed, either consciously or unconsciously, by your emotions?
• Do you realize just how valuable the work you do is if it could be shared with other industries who currently would not collaborate with you or your industry?
The solution to Canada’s polarization challenge that is impeding our future potential can be simply into two key mandates that everyone can decide for themselves:
1. Consciously park whatever polarized position you have, regardless of empirical proof, and first find a shared value with the groups who currently you are un-aligned with in order to gain goodwill and trust to have the tough conversations.
2. To actively be aware of how your emotions, particularly those in the negative realm such as anger, frustration, and anxiousness, push you to further engrain yourself within your position, and fight them so they don’t hinder your ability to work on a complex problem with others.
In concluding, you may naturally be asking yourself who has done this successfully before? Are there any case studies from which to draw some lessons learned? The answer is yes, so please stay tuned for the next issue of The Journal where we will follow up this article with some examples from which any practitioner can draw from.
REFERENCES
Comprehensive references for this article are located online.
David L. Milia
David is the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Energy and Climate Nexus. David has worked as a specialist and advisor for engineering firms, and large energy corporations. His academic experience includes: the Academic Chair for the B. Sc. in Construction Project Management at SAIT, the Chairman of the Canadian Coalition for Green Finance, and the Director of Strategic Centre Initiatives at the Haskayne School of Business at the University of Calgary which included leading the Hunter Centre for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, the Centre for Corporate Sustainability and Energy and Environment Initiatives. David is also an MBA sessional Instructor for “Business of Oil & Gas” and “The Business of Cleantech”.
CHOA JOURNAL — December 2021 16
