MARKING THE WAY

The document evaluates three frameworks for climate milestone implementation: where milestones are bound (national, provincial/territorial, or sectoral levels), how the pathway is determined (by provinces/territories, collectively, by the federal government, or by an expert body), and which government order drives policy development (federal, collaborative with a federal backstop, or provincial/territorial). It weighs the trade-offs between national consistency, regional flexibility, and the likelihood of achieving long-term targets.

• Binding milestones at the national level provides broad direction and avoids regional burden-sharing disputes, but it may downplay the role of non-federal governments. In contrast, provincial and territorial milestones reflect unique regional economies and emissions profiles but may sacrifice flexibility in meeting national targets unless a regional trading mechanism exists. Sectoral milestones provide clarity for policy decisions but risk increasing mitigation costs because they cannot respond to shifting costs and opportunities.
• The process for setting the milestone pathway involves trade-offs between buy-in and target sufficiency. Allowing provinces and territories to set their own targets maximizes regional buy-in but risks an insufficient national sum. Collective determination by all government orders increases the likelihood of meeting long-term targets but may lead to deadlocked negotiations. Federal-led pathways based on consultation build on historical precedence but require more resources and may limit buy-in, while expert-led pathways utilize science and Indigenous knowledge to avoid negotiations but also risk limiting government buy-in.
• Policy development to meet milestones can be driven by the federal government, which offers certainty but limits regional customization. A collaborative approach involving federal, provincial, and territorial governments with a federal backstop increases the probability of meeting milestones and improves coordination, though it requires significant resources and good-faith participation. If provincial and territorial governments drive policy, interjurisdictional tensions are avoided, but there is a risk that subnational policies will lack the ambition needed to reach national milestones.

APA

Canadian Climate Institute (n.d.). MARKING THE WAY. https://climatechoices.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Summary-of-strengths-and-weaknesses-of-options.pdf

Chicago

Canadian Climate Institute. MARKING THE WAY. n.d. https://climatechoices.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Summary-of-strengths-and-weaknesses-of-options.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Canadian Climate Institute |title=MARKING THE WAY |url=https://climatechoices.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Summary-of-strengths-and-weaknesses-of-options.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{canadianclimateinstitutendmarking, author = {{Canadian Climate Institute}}, title = {{MARKING THE WAY}}, institution = {Canadian Climate Institute}, url = {https://climatechoices.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Summary-of-strengths-and-weaknesses-of-options.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }