The Paris Agreement was signed in 2015 by 196 countries amid a wave of global urgency to confront the defining crisis of our time—climate change. Grounded in the best available science, it called for rapid, coordinated action to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. It represented, at the time, a hopeful vision of shared responsibility in the face of a global existential threat.
A decade later, the world has surpassed 1.5 degrees of warming and the planet is literally on fire.
The cracks in the Paris Agreement appeared almost as soon as the ink dried. The U.S. withdrawal under the first Trump administration revealed how fragile a system built on voluntary pledges truly was. Even the renewed enthusiasm for climate under Biden—since reversed, again, by Trump—did not change the underlying reality: global climate action continues to be held hostage by the electoral cycle, by the short-term profit motives of the private market and by the political power of fossil fuel capital.
In Canada, the Paris Agreement paved the way for the 2016 Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change, a plan built around a complex mix of regulations, incentives and targets that promised progress while sidestepping the core issue—continued fossil fuel expansion. Subsequent federal climate plans added specifics and ramped up public climate spending, but a large gap between Canada’s targets and actual emissions remains.
Despite this legacy of underperformance, Ottawa continues to double down on its approach. The latest turn toward “climate competitiveness” in lieu of true emissions reductions signals a rebranding, rather than a reorientation, of the same tried-and-failed approach. Behind the rhetoric of “climate competitiveness,” “clean growth” and similar framings lies an uncomfortable truth: not only are Canadian policy-makers failing to attribute the climate crisis to the fossil fuel industry, but they actually see the industry as part of the solution. It is not.
A decade after Paris, Canada’s challenge is no longer knowing what to do. Instead, the challenge is to break the cycle of denial, delay and deference that subjugates climate policy to the very industries at the heart of the crisis. In this brief, we break down the past decade of climate policy in Canada, highlighting the good, the bad and the ugly of Canadian efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build a cleaner economy. We conclude that policy matters—and that it is not too late to turn things around. The next decade will test whether Canada has the courage to do so.
The good
Even within a decade of contradictions, there have been glimpses of what Canadian climate policy can achieve.
Coal power. Canada’s regulatory phase-out of coal-powered electricity generation stands out as one of its clearest climate victories. Once a significant power source in many parts of the country, Canada has driven coal-fired electricity into permanent decline. By 2030, all provinces except Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia are set to eliminate unabated coal power. Emissions from electricity generation have already fallen by 58 per cent since 2005. The transition proves that binding timelines and public regulation work. However, the conversion of many coal plants to gas power plants underscores that long-term success in the electricity sector still depends on building out new renewable electricity infrastructure.
Methane emissions. Methane is one of the lowest-hanging fruits in terms of emissions reductions. Cutting down on leaks is cheap, fast and technologically simple. It is also effective from a climate perspective, since, in the short term, methane is 80 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Federal and provincial rules have succeeded in cutting methane emissions by 31 per cent since 2015 and overall oil and gas emissions by eight per cent. All it took was basic monitoring and enforcement from federal and provincial regulators.
Electric vehicles. In the last decade, zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) have moved from the margins to the mainstream. Consumer subsidies, stricter environmental standards and changing public attitudes have propelled adoption in Canada and around the world. The transition has also attracted private and public investment in Canada’s emerging electric vehicle supply chain, from critical minerals to domestic battery production. However, whether or not the transition to a cleaner personal transportation sector will continue is unclear. Ottawa ended consumer subsidies for ZEVs last year and recently abandoned its 2026 ZEV sales mandate. More fundamentally, ZEVs alone cannot meet Canada’s transportation needs in a net-zero economy. Instead, electrification must be paired with public transit infrastructure and urban designs that reduce the need for personal vehicles altogether.
Net-zero legislation. The passage of the Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act in 2021 was a milestone for Canadian climate action. No longer could federal governments introduce half-baked emission reduction plans whenever they pleased. The act instead binds the government to produce, monitor and report on comprehensive climate strategies at regular intervals. Those plans must also be consistent with the goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. Legislation is no substitute for action, but the net-zero act laid important groundwork for long-term climate policy.
Heat pumps. Heat pumps are a quiet success story of Canada’s energy transition. By using clean electricity rather than oil or gas to heat (and cool) homes and buildings, heat pumps cut emissions and lower utility costs—an easy win for both affordability and decarbonization. Federal and provincial rebates have driven rapid adoption, but millions of older homes remain dependent on fossil fuels. Without long-term funding, governments risk stalling progress. As climate change makes heatwaves and cold snaps more severe, the lesson is clear: clean heat and air conditioning should be treated as public infrastructure, not a consumer luxury.
Greenwashing. In 2024, thanks to a coalition of health and environmental organizations, Canada amended the Competition Act to require companies to substantiate their environmental claims—effectively making corporate greenwashing illegal. It was a subtle, but significant, win for climate action that helped restore public trust in science. Regulators can now challenge misleading slogans like “net-zero oil” and “clean natural gas” in court. While modest compared to the scale of the crisis, this policy reflected a growing recognition that the battle over climate action is also a battle over truth. Unfortunately, budget 2025 signalled the government’s intention to roll this measure back—an undisguised capitulation to oil industry lobbying.
The bad
Canada has made genuine climate progress, but many important policies have not lived up to their potential or have missed the bigger picture. Despite falling national emissions, progress has been uneven, incomplete and insufficient given the urgency of the crisis.
Consumer carbon pricing. Canadian governments have long treated consumer carbon pricing, the preferred climate policy of many economists, as the cornerstone of climate action. When the federal government’s revenue-neutral carbon price was first introduced in 2017, the approach seemed both politically and economically tenable. However, when inflation and affordability concerns surged following COVID, carbon pricing became a political punching bag. Even though the system worked and did not raise costs for the majority of households, the costs it did create were highly visible and the benefits were not. That made it a political liability. After spending a decade and significant political capital to defend it against disingenuous attacks from political opponents, consumer carbon pricing was ultimately abandoned by the federal government.
Industrial carbon pricing. Large emitter trading systems (LETS) are a central and underappreciated component of Canada’s climate framework. Unfortunately, the roll-out of industrial carbon pricing across Canada has been marred by incoherence and polluter-friendly loopholes. The oil and gas sector pays an effective carbon price of just $6 per tonne, a fraction of the official benchmark. Canada’s patchwork of federal and provincial industrial carbon pricing systems could yet deliver dramatic emissions reductions, but they must be made more stringent, both to reduce industrial emissions and to generate more public revenue to fund genuine climate action. Proposals for a carbon border adjustment (CBA), which would insulate Canadian industries from high-polluting international competitors, remain unrealized.
Oil and gas sector emissions cap. Oil and gas production accounts for 30 per cent of Canada’s emissions—the largest share of any sector of the economy—and in 2023, the federal government officially supported the imposition of a hard cap on emissions from the sector. However, pushback from the governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan, as well as the industry itself, has weakened proposed regulations and delayed implementation. Unfortunately, budget 2025 revealed the government’s intention to eliminate the emissions cap, ostensibly in exchange for provincial support in other areas. Without it, Canada has few tools for phasing down oil and gas production itself, not just managing upstream pollution from the sector.
Public transit. After oil and gas, transportation is the most polluting sector of the Canadian economy, responsible for 25 per cent of national emissions. Rather than invest in collective mobility, governments have, over the past decade, doubled down on the individual consumer model. Public transit ridership collapsed during COVID-19, triggering service cuts and fare hikes that hit low-income, youth and racialized communities hardest. Transit agencies still run seven per cent fewer services than in 2016, in part due to waning operational funding. Replacing every gas car with an electric one is neither feasible nor just, which makes a mass expansion of both intra-city and inter-city transit capacity more important than ever.
The ugly
While the “bad” is characterized by policy missteps and missed opportunities, the “ugly” exposes the consequences of expanded corporate power, misinformation and policy fragility.
Fossil fuel subsidies. Canada ranks among the top countries for governments financing fossil fuels. In 2024 alone, the sector received an astonishing $30 billion, far more than the $10-15 billion allocated for climate action, although the absence of a transparent accounting of subsidies means these figures likely understate the total. Governments hide much of this funding in plain sight through tax deductions, discounted royalty rates and low-cost financing delivered through public agencies. Even as governments introduce new climate plans and ratchet up targets, they continue to support and sign off on new extraction projects—from a $34-billion, publicly funded oil pipeline to multiple liquified natural gas (LNG) terminals on the West Coast. Each new subsidy deepens Canadian dependence on an industry that should be in managed decline.
Lobbying and political capture. Fossil fuel lobbying continues to be the most organized political force in Ottawa. In 2024, oil and gas companies and associations logged at least 1,100 meetings with federal officials—more than four per work day. Lobbying rules keep disclosures opaque by design, so the true total is likely higher. Major oil and gas firms often don’t disclose total lobbying expenditures or even acknowledge direct political activity. This secrecy means that investors and the public cannot trace how private influence undermines public climate goals. Any time a major regulation, from methane to emissions caps, is delayed, weakened or quietly shelved, oil lobbyists are playing a role.
Fossil fuel propaganda. Industry reach extends far beyond politics. A recent report found 39 oil and gas companies are actively shaping K-12 education across Canada through branded materials and partnerships. These programs routinely frame climate science as “debate,” present fossil fuels as sustainable and shift responsibility from corporations to individuals. Deliberate distortion is not education, it’s propaganda. By filling the funding gap left by disinvestment in public education, companies are securing their longevity and enabling mistrust in science itself. In Canada, 78 per cent of youth report that climate change affects their mental health. Education should empower youth to think critically and imagine a new future, yet industry influence in Canadian classrooms undermines that very purpose.
Pollution and public health. The toll of Canada’s policy failures is measured not only in rising emissions but in illness and loss, as fossil fuel combustion and industrial emissions now drive the heat and drought conditions fuelling record wildfires. In 2023, fires burned 15 million hectares of land, producing Canada’s worst air quality in 25 years. More than half the population breathed air exceeding national safety standards. A recent study estimated about 1,400 deaths per year in Canada between 2020 and 2024 due to wildfire smoke, and lost labour income of $1.4 billion in 2024 due to extreme heat exposure. In Alberta’s oil sands, emissions are underreported by up to 65 per cent and toxic spills are routinely hidden from public view. For downstream nations like the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, these are not statistics. They are lived realities of rare cancers, respiratory illness, birth defects and generations of preventable loss.
Attacks on Indigenous sovereignty. Nowhere are the costs of extraction more visible than in the ongoing suppression of Indigenous sovereignty. Across the country, Indigenous land defenders continue to face surveillance, criminalization and militarized policing for resisting fossil fuel expansion and protecting their lands and communities. From Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs opposing the Coastal GasLink pipeline to Dene, Cree and Métis Nations who stopped the Teck Frontier and Pierre River tar sands mines, Indigenous resistance has consistently exposed the violence required to sustain Canada’s resource economy. Beyond Canada’s borders, its mining companies rank among the top drivers of ecological destruction across the Global South.
Market “fund”-amentalism. Instead of direct investment in low-carbon housing, energy and transit, the federal government has increasingly turned toward financial vehicles, such as the Canada Infrastructure Bank (CIB) and the Canada Growth Fund (CGF), to “leverage” private capital. Together, these institutions hold $50 billion in public funds, yet are designed to attract investors rather than deliver long-term public benefit. The CIB, launched in 2017 to finance public green infrastructure, has failed to deliver measurable climate outcomes—slowed by costly public-private partnerships, limited transparency and missed investment targets. The CGF, presented as a clean-economy accelerator, has, instead, extended fossil fuel lifelines. In 2024, the fund pledged up to $1 billion to a gas-producer subsidiary for unproven carbon-capture technology, guaranteeing industry profits while prolonging emissions. By outsourcing decarbonization to investors, the outcome is predictable: slow progress, stalled investments and a decade lost in the void of market-led climate action.
What’s next?
Canada’s track record since signing the Paris Agreement is grim—significant rhetorical progress marred in practice by broken promises, adherence to the status quo and suppression of transformative alternatives. As the consequences of that inaction intensify, the next decade must trade rhetoric for rebuilding.
A decade of climate policy has unfolded alongside widening inequality and a new wave of populism that feeds on it. In Canada, the politics of alienation have been weaponized most aggressively in Alberta and Saskatchewan, where premiers have twisted legitimate regional grievances into a narrative of persecution. Premiers routinely misrepresent federal climate measures as plots to “wipe out” local industries or “punish” the West.
The irony is that during the same period in which premiers claimed the federal government was killing the oil and gas industry, production, exports and profits all hit record highs. Populist rhetoric about affordability and sovereignty distracts from a deeper truth: Canada’s resource wealth continues to enrich a shrinking corporate elite while rural and working-class communities are facing rising costs, unstable jobs and climate disasters. Inequality fractures climate solidarity. Combatting populist backlash will require not just better policy, but better politics—rooted in equity, transparency and shared purpose.
Ottawa’s new buzzword, “climate competitiveness,” signals another turn toward public subsidies for fossil fuel infrastructure. Similarly, the emphasis on technologies like carbon capture or negative emissions to offset continued extraction is another approach destined to fail. Bankrolling these projects ultimately extends the lifespan of fossil fuels rather than accelerating their decline. These speculative, publicly subsidized ventures are not engines of growth. They are future stranded assets, and the public should not bear their cost. The alternative lies in rebuilding what the market has eroded: public capacity and a collective vision.
Canada must redefine what successful climate action looks like. It means long-term policies that support clean air, affordable homes, dignified work and restored lands, not short-term economic growth or investor returns. Above all, the next 10 years demand a shift from business as usual to a politics of care, justice and collective responsibility. A decade after Paris, Canada’s test is not technical, it is moral—whether we can move from competitiveness to courage, and from extracting value to sustaining life. If Canada can make that shift, it could finally fulfill the promise of the Paris Agreement, not through lofty pledges, but through the everyday work of repair and transformation.
