Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:44:54.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Playing Defence: Early Responses to Conflict Expansion in the Oil Sands Policy Subsystem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 November 2011

George Hoberg  and
Jeffrey Phillips
George Hoberg*
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
Jeffrey Phillips*
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
*
George Hoberg, Department of Forest Resources Management, University of British Columbia, Forest Science Centre 2037, 2045-2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, george.hoberg@ubc.ca
Jeff Phillips, jptphillips@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Abstract. This article examines how powerful policy actors defend themselves against opponents' strategies of conflict expansion through a case study on the oil sands of Alberta. In response to an escalation of criticism of its performance on environmental regulation and related issues, the government of Alberta has pursued a strategy of engaging in several multi-stakeholder consultations. We argue that in examining subsystem change, it is essential to go beyond an examination of formal institutional mechanisms to examine policy impacts. Thus far, despite a significant pluralisation of consultative mechanisms on the oil sands, there is little or no evidence of a shift in power away from pro-oil sands interests. This strategy of selective opening is designed to bolster the legitimacy of the policy process while maintaining control over decision rules and venues.

Résumé. Cet article étudie le rapport de force et la stratégie de défense des acteurs politiques lorsqu'un conflit dégénère, comme cela s'est produit dans le dossier des sables bitumineux de l'Alberta. Devant une recrudescence des critiques à l'égard de sa performance au chapitre de la réglementation environnementale, le gouvernement de l'Alberta a adopté une stratégie qui consiste à effectuer des consultations avec plusieurs intervenants. Nous soutenons qu'en examinant les changements du sous-système, il est vital d'aller au delà de la simple étude des mécanismes institutionnels pour évaluer l'impact des politiques. En dépit de la pluralité des mécanismes de consultation mis en place, rien ne semble indiquer qu'une partie quelconque du pouvoir ait échappé aux acteurs de l'exploitation des sables bitumineux. Cette stratégie d'ouverture sélective est conçue pour renforcer la légitimité du processus politique tout en gardant le contrôle sur les prises de décision et les centres décisionnels.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , September 2011 , pp. 507 - 527
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aboriginal Consultation Interdepartmental Committee (ACIC). Oil Sands Consultations. 2007a. Aboriginal Consultation Final Report. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Aboriginal Consultation Interdepartmental Committee (ACIC). Oil Sands Consultations. 2007b. Aboriginal Consultation Final Report—Appendices—1. Phase II Aboriginal Consultation Process. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Alberta Energy. Alberta Energy—About Us—Business Units. n.d.http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/About_Us/988.asp (accessed July 2, 2008).Google Scholar
Alberta Royalty Review Panel (2007), Our Fair Share—Report of the Alberta Royalty Review Panel. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, F.R. and Jones, B.D.. 1991. “Agenda Dynamics and Policy Subsystems.” The Journal of Politics 53 (4): 1044–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownsey, K. 2007. “The New Oil Order: The Post Staples Paradigm and the Canadian Upstream Oil and Gas Industry.” Canadian Political Science Review 1 (1): 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashore, B., McDermott, C. and Auld, K. Levin with G. and Newsom, D.. 2006. The Shaping and Reshaping of British Columbia Forest Policy in the Global Era: A Review of Governmental and Non-governmental Strategic Initiatives. Keynote address to Association of BC Forest Professionals annual general meeting, Victoria BC.Google Scholar
Chastko, P. 2004. Developing Alberta's Oil Sands: From Karl Clark to Kyoto. Calgary: University of Calgary Press.Google Scholar
Chiasson, C. 2007a. “Governing the Oil Sands.” Environmental Law Centre—News Brief 22 (2): 4–17.Google Scholar
Clarke, Tony. 2008. Tar Sands Showdown: Canada and the New Politics of Oil in the Age of Climate Change. Toronto: Lorimer.Google Scholar
Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). 2011. CEMA Mission and Goals. http://cemaonline.ca/about-cema/cema-mission.html (accessed July 19, 2011).Google Scholar
Cumulative Environmental Management Association (CEMA). 2007. Annual Report. http://www.cemaonline.ca/content/view/65/115/ (May 13, 2008).Google Scholar
Ekelund, M. 2007. Update—Oil Sands Consultations. Paper presented to the Hydrocarbon Upgrading Task Force. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Government of Alberta. Alberta Environment. 1999a. Regional Sustainable Development Strategy for the Athabasca Oil Sands Area. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Government of Alberta. 1999b. Alberta's Commitment to Sustainable Resource and Environmental Management. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Government of Alberta. Alberta Environment and Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. 2001. Regional Sustainable Development Strategy for the Athabasca Oil Sands Area—Progress Report. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Government of Alberta. 2006a. Oil Sands Consulations—Mineable Oil Sands Strategy—FAQs. http://www.oilsandsconsultations.gov.ab.ca/MOSS_FAQs.html (accessed May 2, 2008).Google Scholar
Government of Alberta. 2006b. Oil Sands Consultations—Phase I. http://www.oilsandsconsultations.gov.ab.ca/P1_table_of_content.html (accessed May 8, 2008).Google Scholar
Government of Alberta. Alberta Treasury Board. 2009. Responsible Actions: A Plan for Alberta's Oil Sands. http://www.treasuryboard.alberta.ca/docs/GOA_ResponsibleActions_web.pdf (February 1, 2010).Google Scholar
Government of Alberta. 2011. Draft Lower Athabasca Integrated Regional Plan 2011—2021. http://www.landuse.alberta.ca/RegionalPlans/LowerAthabasca/documents/DLARP%20Regional%20Plan_FINAL_March%2029%202011_1%2044%20pm.pdf (May 27, 2011).Google Scholar
Kennett, S. A. 2007. Closing the Performance Gap: The Challenge for Cumulative Effects Management in Alberta's Athabasca Oil Sands Region. CIRL Occasional Paper #18. Calgary: Canadian Institute of Resources Law.Google Scholar
Kingdon, J. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policy. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Markusoff, J. 2007. “Stelmach pours cash into Fort McMurray: Extra funds earmarked to help region catch up with explosive growth.” The Edmonton Journal. February 27, 2007.Google Scholar
Marsden, William. 2007. Stupid to the Last Drop: How Alberta Is Bringing Environmental Armageddon to Canada (And Doesn't Seem to Care). Toronto ON: Knopf Canada.Google Scholar
Multi-stakeholder Committee (MSC). 2006. Oil Sands Consultations. Multi-stakeholder Committee Interim Report. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Multi-stakeholder Committee (MSC). 2007. Oil Sands Consultations. Multi-stakeholder Committee Final Report. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
National Oil Sands Task Force. 1995. Canada's Oil Sands Industry: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. Edmonton: Alberta Chamber of Resources.Google Scholar
Nikiforuk, Andrew. 2008. Tar Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent. Vancouver BC: Greystone and the David Suzuki Foundation.Google Scholar
Oliver, C. 1991. “Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes.” The Academy of Management Review 16 (1): 145–79.Google Scholar
Parkland Institute. 1999. Giving Away the Alberta Advantage—Are Albertans Receiving Maximum Revenues from their Oil and Gas? Edmonton: Parkland Institute.Google Scholar
Pembina Institute. 2007. Backgrounder—Albertans' Perceptions of Oil Sands Development: Poll—Part II: A Fair Share for Albertans. Drayton Valley AB: The Pembina Institute.Google Scholar
Pembina Institute. 2008. Environmental Groups Pull Out of Multi-stakeholder Oilsands Process. Drayton Valley AB: The Pembina Institute.Google Scholar
Pralle, S.B. 2006. Branching Out, Digging In: Environmental Advocacy and Agenda Setting. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Radke, D. 2006. Investing in our Future: Responding to the Rapid Growth of Oil Sands Development. Edmonton: Government of Alberta.Google Scholar
Sabatier, P.A. 1988. “An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein.” Policy Sciences 21: 129–68.Google Scholar
Selznick, Philip. 1966. TVA and the Grass Roots: A Study in the Sociology of Formal Organization. New York: Harper Torchbooks.Google Scholar
Spaling, H., Zwier, J., Ross, W. and Creasey, R.. 2000. “Managing Regional Cumulative Effects of Oil Sands Development in Alberta, Canada.” Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 2: 507–10.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. and Raynolds, M.. 2006. Thinking Like an Owner: Overhauling the Royalty and Tax Treatment of Alberta's Oil Sands. Oil Sands Issue Paper no. 3. Drayton Valley, Alta: The Pembina Institute.Google Scholar
Urquhart, I. 2008. Prison Break? The Politics of Energy Royalties in Alberta. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, Vancouver BC.Google Scholar
Woynillowicz, D., Severson-Baker, C., and Raynolds, M.. 2005. Oil Sands Fever: The Environmental Implications of Canada's Oil Sands Rush. Drayton Valley, Alta: The Pembina Institute.Google Scholar
Woynillowicz, D. 2007. Oil Sands Multi-stakeholder Committee Recommendations Fail to Address Runaway Pace of Oil Sands Development. Media Release. http://www.oilsandswatch.org/media-release/1492 (January 23, 2007).Google Scholar