This is a HTML version of the original PDF document. The HTML version is being provided for reading purposes only and is not the official version of the document.

Research Paper #6

---

Emerging Issues

Dr. Peter Victor, et al York University

Emerging Issues
and the Ministry of the Environment

 

 

 

A Report to
Executive Resource Group

 

 

 

 

Peter Victor, Ed Hanna and Jane Pagel
with assistance from Ani Koulian

December 22, 2000

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The MOE and Emerging Issues
1.2 What Might be Gained From a Formal Emerging Issues Procedure?
1.3 Approach

2. AN OVERVIEW OF EMERGING ISSUES

2.2 A Classification of Emerging Issues
2.3 Phases of Emerging Issues

3. A REVIEW OF BEST PRACTICES

3.1 International Experience
3.2 Japanese/UK Technology Forecast Program
3.3 The Shell Group - Building and Using Scenarios
3.5 Ontario Experience

4. AN EMERGING ISSUES PROCEDURE FOR THE MOE

4.1 Description
4.2 Testing the Emerging Issues Procedure: an Acid Rain Retrospective

5. IMPLEMENTATION OF AN EMERGING ISSUES PROCEDURE IN THE MOE

5.1 Purpose/Goals
5.2 Scope
5.3 Methodology
5.4 Implementation

6. CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

LIST OF PEOPLE INTERVIEWED

ANNEX 1: THE DISCOVERY OF CFCS IN THE 1970s AS A THREAT TO THE OZONE LAYER

ANNEX 2: A RETROSPECTIVE LOOK AT ACID RAIN AS AN EMERGING ISSUE OF THE 1960s

Executive Summary

The Ontario Ministry of the Environment has had in place, since its inception, a number of formal and informal mechanisms for identifying emerging environmental issues, generally relying on the expertise of its staff and their contacts for providing early warning. It is timely to rethink the existing process, look at what lessons can be learned from other organisations and whether these can be incorporated into an improved emerging issues procedure for the Ministry.

The project team considered four questions:

1. What are the necessary elements of an emerging issues tool?
2. What are some of the best practices in other jurisdictions?
3. How do those jurisdictions implement emerging issues models?
4. What implementation is appropriate for the Ontario Ministry of the Environment?

To address these questions, key literature on emerging issues was reviewed and best practices were examined from jurisdictions in the United States and Europe; interviews were conducted with senior officials in Canada and the United States; and a suggested procedure was identified and described. The report also uses the example of acid rain in the 1960s and 1970s to retrospectively 'test' the procedure and to examine the potential benefits and downside risks. Briefly, possible implementation options are considered for addressing emerging issues within the existing structure of the Ministry.

The suggested emerging issues procedure incorporates the best practices from international experience, as summarised by Munn, Whyte and Timmerman (January 2000,) together with those identified by the Environmental Futures Board of the Science Advisory Board (January 1995) for the United States Environmental Protection Agency. This approach is based on a modification of the US EPA system for top-down, bottom-up input together with a formal issues scanning process, followed by appropriate prioritising and analysing steps to focus action on the most significant emerging issues.

The report 'tests' the approach and demonstrates that if such a formal foresight process had been in place in Ontario in the late 1960s, one or more impacts of acid rain could have been identified a decade earlier. This could have allowed earlier effective preventive and remedial measures, bringing environmental and economic benefits to Ontario.

The literature search and interviews discussed in the report showed that emerging issues often arise from issues that are known but their significance has not yet been realised. Another point of agreement is that the process for providing early warning should be transparent, cast a wide net for input and involve a broad census of opinion. This approach presents a real risk for the Ministry to be faced with unrealistic public and political expectations for action on all potentially emerging issues. Nonetheless, the examination of best practices supports the broad involvement of stakeholders and an open and systematic issues prioritization system as being effective antidotes for this risk.

1. Introduction

The Executive Resource Group (ERG) has been retained by Cabinet Office to conduct a management review of environmental best practices in other jurisdictions. This report was commissioned by ERG to assist with the identification of and response to emerging issues as one specific aspect of the larger task.

1.1 The MOE and Emerging Issues

The MOE, like many other similar environmental departments, has always concerned itself with emerging issues without assigning staff specifically to this task and without having a routine formal procedure for doing so. Rather, the Ministry's approach has been to rely on the expertise of its staff, many of whom maintain extensive networks of contacts in Canada and abroad, and to provide opportunities through various mechanisms for them to bring forward issues that may warrant attention. For example, the Ministry includes a 'new initiatives' component in the development of its annual budget whereby resources may be allocated to emerging issues. However, the MOE does not have a formal procedure for identifying emerging issues: a process that would systematically and regularly assemble views about possible new issues, prioritise the issues based on explicit criteria, and, where appropriate, take various types of action from research and monitoring to standards, policy and program development to respond to these issues.

1.2 What Might be Gained From a Formal Emerging Issues Procedure?

The potential gains from an effective emerging issues procedure¹ fall into two main categories: environmental (resulting from earlier and more effective preventative and remedial action) and economic (from better capital and human resource investment decisions and enhanced marketing opportunities for new technologies.) A brief look at depletion of the ozone layer by CFC's and other chemicals, which became a key issue in the 1980's, shows that even when environmental benefits from early action may be insignificant for a region like Ontario, there are potential economic benefits.

The effective international agreement on the elimination of CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) and other ozone depleting substances, is one of the most successful environmental management stories in recent years. For many years, CFCs were widely used as aerosol-spray propellants, air-conditioning refrigerants, and foaming agents in plastics manufacture. Between 1990 and 1994, Ontario introduced several regulations for CFCs and other ozone depleting substances, as did other jurisdictions in Canada and abroad.²

What would have been the advantages to Ontario of acting any sooner if an emerging issues procedure had given the MOE advanced warning of the threat to the ozone layer from CFCs? Unilateral action by Ontario to control CFCs would have had no noticeable impact on the depletion of the ozone layer since Ontario emissions were such a small proportion of the world's total emissions. At the same time, Ontario companies would have been disadvantaged because they would have had to incur additional costs not imposed on competitors.

In hindsight, if the MOE had taken early action on CFCs, opportunities for the Ontario economy might well have been realised. The early development of alternative methods for cleaning applications in electronic assemblies and precision parts and the development of CFC substitutes could have provided business opportunities for Ontario companies³.

The CFC phase-out also provided an impetus to develop and invest in a new generation of energy efficient air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment. Large scale air-conditioning units for buildings have been and are being converted to equipment that uses non-CFC refrigerants. This conversion to more efficient equipment is bringing substantial energy savings with collateral reductions in emissions of air pollutants from electric power plants. These were business opportunities that might have been exploited elsewhere by Ontario firms had the MOE been able to alert companies to the possibility of a ban on CFCs and provided regulatory or other incentives to develop technologies to substitute for CFCs.

In retrospect: 1) Had the MOE employed a formal emerging issues procedure in the 1970s and 80's, there is a possibility that the CFC issue could have been identified by the MOE well ahead of the Montreal Protocol in 1987. 2) There would have been no environmental benefits to Ontario if the province had acted sooner to reduce the production and use of CFCs since ozone depletion is a global problem requiring a global response. 3) Ontario might have gained an economic advantage had it developed new technologies and processes for others to buy once the problem of CFCs was high on the world's policy agenda.

In Annex 2 a detailed retrospective analysis is presented of the application of an emerging issues procedure to acid rain. As that example suggests, significant environmental and economic benefits might have been realised in Ontario had a procedure for identifying emerging environmental issues been in place in the 1960s.

1.3 Approach

The project team was asked to consider four questions:

1. What are the necessary elements of an emerging issues tool?
2. What are some of the best practices in other jurisdictions?
3. How do those jurisdictions implement emerging issues models?
4. What implementation is appropriate for the Ontario Ministry of the Environment?

To answer these questions, the project team undertook several activities that are described below:

1. The most important findings from the key literature on emerging issues were distilled:

   There is an extensive literature that has some bearing on emerging issues, in areas such as strategic planning, environmental scans, risk management, and futures analysis. However, there is very little devoted to specific procedures for identifying and responding to emerging issues. In reviewing the literature (see references) the project team focussed primarily on recent methodological surveys supplemented by items that seemed of particular relevance to emerging issues in Ontario. The considerations for determining relevance were:

   • Does the publication describe an emerging issues procedure?
   • Is the description theoretical or does it also include practical applications?
   • Is the focus on emerging environmental issues or emerging issues more generally?
   • Are lessons described that could be relevant to the MOE?
2. Organisations in Canada and the United States were contacted to learn about their experience and practices for addressing emerging issues:

   The project team contacted various people with knowledge about emerging issues. The team is grateful to all those who were able to provide information useful in this report:

   The following questions were used in the interviews as a guide rather than as a formal survey. They provided the basis for a conversation rather than a structured interview:

   1. Does your organisation/jurisdiction have a formal procedure/policy for identifying and managing emerging issues?
   2. If so, what is the method employed in dealing with emerging issues?
   3. What studies if any were commissioned or relied on to guide the design and operation of your emerging issues procedures?
   4. Is there a designated group of individuals who deal with emerging issues?
   5. If there are specific individuals who deal with emerging issues are they from various departments?
   6. Do these individuals form a committee?
   7. How frequently do these individuals and/or the committee meet?
   8. Who do they report to?
   9. How are identified emerging issues dealt with?
   10. How is success measured?
   11. At any stage is there public involvement?
   12. At any stage is there stakeholder involvement?
   13. How long has you organisation been involved in a formal emerging issues evaluation process.
       
       
3. A specific emerging issues procedure for possible adoption by the MOE was identified:

   Drawing on the literature review and interviews, the project team compared the recommended approach described in Munn, Whyte and Timmerman, (Managing Emerging Issues: An Approach for the Ministry of the Environment. Final Report, January 2000) with the procedure developed for the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA, SAB Report 1995) both of which were intended for environmental protection agencies. The team considered several factors in deciding which, if any, of these might be best for the MOE:

   • Comprehensiveness: the effectiveness of the approach for drawing upon a wide range of information.
   • Clarity and completeness: the description of the procedure such that others not involved in its development can implement it.
   • Capacity to scope down and prioritise: from an initial overview of a wide range of potential emerging issues there should be a systematic process for narrowing the set of issues using, where possible, quantitative methods to minimise subjectivity.
   
   
   
4. Possible institutional arrangements for addressing emerging issues in the MOE were considered:

Implementation of an emerging issues procedure should draw upon what has and has not worked elsewhere and why, in light of the specific circumstances of the MOE.

2. An Overview of Emerging Issues

In this section, emerging issues are defined and classified. Also, a sequence of phases through which emerging issues commonly progress is presented. Much of this section draws on the work of Munn, Whyte and Timmerman who have written extensively on emerging issues.

2.1 A Definition of Emerging Issues

An emerging issue is an issue which is not yet generally recognised, but which may have significant positive or negative impact on human and/or ecosystem health over the next 20 plus years.⁴

2.2 A Classification of Emerging Issues

Munn, Whyte and Timmerman (1999) observe that emerging issues can arise or be associated with one or more of the following⁵:

• Political, social, economic, financial, institutional or technological developments that may cause changes in current trends of human activity leading to environmental change;
• New evidence or theory which suggests potentially large environmental change, but which is currently either not widely accepted, or is considered unproven;
• Lack of adequate policy, action or leadership on an existing issue that may become more significant or urgent in the future.

A useful classification of emerging issues has been developed by Kalhok and Gomes (as reported by Munn, Whyte and Timmerman, 1999):

Unforeseen issues - new issues that appear without warning (e.g. stratospheric ozone depletion caused by the release of CFCs into the atmosphere)

Unexpected events - events known to be possible but their severity, timing and location is unanticipated (e.g. large oil spills, accidental poisonings, severe smog and air pollution events, biological invasions)

Emergence of new findings - existing issues brought into new light by new developments or findings or by media involvement (e.g. concern over pesticides and herbicides triggered by publication of Silent Spring, discovery of toxics in the Love Canal, discovery of contaminants in the Arctic, acid rain)

Changes in progression of trends - deviations from the expected course of events that are ecologically and/or economically harmful (e.g. climate change)

Shifts in environmental perception - the way in which environmental issues are viewed can change remarkably rapidly (e.g. Earthrise photo from Appollo affected people's view of the limits, beauty and fragility of the Earth; attention has moved from local to national to international issues, issues are seen as interconnected.)

While there are some overlaps among these various categories they do provide a reminder that emerging issues can take many forms and come about through many avenues. A useful emerging issues procedure should be able to identify issues from each of these categories, though it may be more effective for some types of issues than others.

2.3 Phases of Emerging Issues

Munn, Whyte and Timmerman (January 2000) present a 'typology of concern'. They suggest that all emerging issues pass through a sequence of four phases, each of which calls for a different response from the MOE:

Horizon Phase - "issues that have been identified, but have not yet crystallised to the point where their implications and potential impacts for Ontario can be determined...It is very unlikely that the Ministry would spend substantial resources on any of these issues until they mature."

Concern Phase - in this phase a management strategy beyond information gathering is triggered when indicated by one or more "criteria of concern" such as: scientific consensus forming, substantial public concern, potential for serious risk, appearing in multiple jurisdictions, availability of appropriate response. The management response should be linked to the characteristics of the emerging issue.

Action Phase - "the issue has entered the full formal policy formulation stage, and has become a current issue."

Retrospective Stage - "issues that return to an earlier phase of an issue, to begin the cycle all over again, and or represent issues with 'trailing edges' ".

Munn, Whyte and Timmerman (January 2000) present two matrices to organise information about emerging issues in the horizon and concern phases. These are components of the emerging issues procedure that they recommend. They also present an illustrative mapping of issues according to the four phases. Munn, Whyte and Timmerman's account of how these matrices are to be used is not very detailed. They seem to be designed to present basic principles (e.g. the relation of issue, levels of concerns and management strategy) rather than a thoroughly worked out emerging issues process.

One comment of note is that, in reference to the "matrix of concern", the authors state that " each cell could be filled with a numerical, or better, qualitative assessment of where that issue was in terms of how concerned one should be about the issue, and what the best mix of strategies might be." (p.54) No explanation is given for favouring qualitative assessments over quantitative assessments.

3. A Review of Best Practices

The project team looked at experience with emerging issues internationally and in Canada based on the literature, telephone interviews and the direct experience of one of the members of the project team with an issues analysis exercise in Ontario.

3.1 International Experience

Whyte (July 1999) provides a comprehensive review of international experience in formal foresight from which she draws many lessons. These lessons are summarised in Munn, Whyte and Timmerman (January 2000) A similar set of observations on desirable characteristics of an early warning system are given in a report prepared for the US EPA (Science Advisory Board, January 1995.) In this section, both are combined into a single list. This list of lessons is organised according to the purposes and goals of an emerging issues procedure, scope, methodology and implementation.⁶

Purpose/Goals

• Ensure that there is a common understanding at the outset of the purpose and limitations of a foresight exercise as a policy process.
• The process of thinking about the future is as important as the results.
• Make goals and where possible, values explicit.

Scope

• The foresight exercise should include not only future problems, but future opportunities, new developments and setting action agendas.
• Do not constrain foresight strictly to the present mandate of the organisation.
• A time horizon of up to 20 or more years is desirable, specifically identifying immediate, mediate, and long-term emerging issues.
• Draw from a wide range of sources to help assure that a broad net is cast (i.e. data bases, models, experts, other institutions.)
• Be global in scope without sacrificing attention to national, regional and local issues.
• Encourage rather than repress imaginative views of the future that may seem "far out" today but may nevertheless represent real threats or opportunities.

Methodology

• Anchor foresight in science.
• Employ more than one potential issues identification method to improve results, and to provide different opportunities for involving stakeholders.
• Be quantitative, wherever possible, to facilitate analysis.
• Recognise many futures are possible and the conditions that actually emerge are likely to be the product of a huge number of large and small changes and decisions that aggregate in a way that is unknown yet may create vastly different prospects.
• Be tolerant of errors and omissions since no analytic method will eliminate the uncertainties of the future.

Implementation

• Involve outside scientists and experts.
• Cast the stakeholder net as widely as practical.
• Include a public participation process.
• Consider institutional arrangements for foresight, particularly to ensure credibility, strengthen internal champions, and promote inter-departmental collaboration.
• At the outset, establish measures of success for program effectiveness.
• Operate in a continuous rather than a "one-shot" mode.
• Have an institutional memory, so that suggestions that are made today for lack of data or interest can be reassessed in the future.
• Be subject to scrutiny by people outside of the process to help avoid the introduction of institutional biases.
• Link to and provide information to other activities of the Ministry; e.g. an effective early warning system should trigger R & D activities and should provide an important foundation for Ministry planning.
• Report periodically on principal findings about prospective threats and opportunities to inform the provincial agenda and stimulate discussion about priorities and policies.

Michael Brody of the Planning, Analysis, Accountability Office of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) was interviewed by telephone. He reported that the work of the US EPA Science Advisory Board helped people think about emerging issues but no immediate actions were taken to implement the recommended approach. More recently, an agency wide Futures Network was established that involves the whole agency and which has its own budget. The Futures Network consists of an informal linkage among people who have started sharing information, planning, training and scenario building. Efforts are now underway to start using the formal approach recommended by the Science Advisory Board.

A telephone interview was also held with Marty Rosen, Acting Director of the Division of Science, Research and Technology in the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. There is no formal procedure or policy for identifying and prioritising emerging issues in New Jersey, although the Science Division tracks environmental science nationally and internationally, and is cognisant of stakeholder and public concerns. Sometimes emerging issues are identified and responses are developed within the Division or in collaboration with another organisation in the Department. There is a management structure that decides which emerging issues to pursue through a systematic justification process. Research priorities are based primarily on the relevance of a topic to the Department's mission and responsibilities and relative environmental risk.

The project team also took note of experience in Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry later adopted by the UK, and the Shell Group, two organisations well known for their advanced work on emerging issues.

3.2 Japanese/UK Technology Forecast Program

Japan has often shown an ability to exploit new technology well in advance of its competitors. First used in the 1970s, Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry applied a "Delphi" technique, distributing questionnaires to thousands of people requesting opinions on a broad range of scientific issues (Brown, 1993.) This process is now repeated every five years and the results are used to identify technology areas for dedicated, pre-competitive research. To further ensure success, the Ministry typically provides half the funding, while private, interested companies contribute the balance and share in the findings. A competitive process is then used to select the companies who will turn the research into marketable products. The Ministry retains the rights to patents that result from the research and these are licensed to Japanese companies to widen the technology distribution. One of the more notable examples of success with this program is the Advanced Battery Electric Power Storage Systems Project, in which 11 collaborating companies participate.

This program was considered so successful that Britain's science minister used it as the basis for the Technology Foresight Programme announced in a 1993 White Paper. The process involved soliciting views from thousands of scientists and business people who were asked to identify fields of research that would be most likely to yield new products and target markets. A broader goal was to "achieve a key cultural exchange: better communication, interaction and mutual understanding between the scientific community, industry and government."

While the emphasis in this approach was to provide early identification of which technologies will shape the world's economy in the next few decades - technologies such as wireless computing, DVDs, fuel cells, and cold fusion - there are process lessons that can be applied to the identification of emerging environmental issues.

The British version was run by a steering committee that divided science and technology into nine or ten areas, each of which had about six experts who recruited other panel members. Given the make-up of the panels and the broad distribution of the questionnaires, input could be solicited from a broad population of stakeholders, results summarised and then returned up to four times assessing change in viewpoints based on the other participants' views. Once a consensus emerged, the selected technologies could be screened against several criteria, such as likelihood of successful commercialization. It is useful to note the similarities with the proposed emerging issues procedure for the MOE described in section 4.1 below.

3.3 The Shell Group - Building and Using Scenarios

The Shell Group of companies, which includes Shell Canada, has been using scenario development and assessment as part of their long term planning for over two decades. Scenarios are descriptions of a plausible future, and not exact predictions of the future, but provide a framework to stimulate strategic thinking. Shell believes that future thinking is the key to long term prosperity and competitiveness.

Based on their web site description, scenarios help organizations consider several possible outcomes for the future so that different types of uncertainty can be addressed. Scenarios help us "think the unthinkable, anticipate the unknowable and utilise both to make better strategic decisions." The main benefits are identified as:

• Helping individuals adjust their mental map and truly think outside the box
• Improving a management team's ability to manage uncertainty and risk
• Reducing the level of "crisis management" and improved management anticipation
• Increasing breadth of vision and ability to spot change earlier.

It is Shell's belief that forecasting, while useful, can overlook discontinuities arising from geopolitical changes, societal changes, technological advances, environmental impacts or economic restructuring.

Shell's view of the future is broadly influenced by two scenarios they have developed, which are influenced by powerful forces such as globalization, liberalisation and new technologies. The two scenarios, which are briefly described on their web site, are "New Game" and "Power." Another interesting and related initiative is the announcement of a writing prize sponsored by Shell and The Economist for an essay on "The World in 2050."

3.4 Canadian Experience

According to Bob Slater, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Environment Canada does not use a formal process to deal with emerging issues per se. However, there is a series of documents that give views about possible future issues. Priorities can be triggered by many considerations the most important of which is science. Environment Canada undertakes an assessment of the science relating to a potential emerging issue, makes a determination of its significance and then decides how to manage the risks identified. Slater expressed the view that much university-based science takes a reductionist approach that does not cover ecosystem health in its entirety. He also stressed that every issue has its own timing and its own rhythm and information is never complete raising the question of "When do you know enough to act?" The precautionary principle can be invoked but cost-effectiveness remains an important consideration for Environment Canada in setting priorities.

The Canadian Council of Environment Ministers (CCME), which has its own staff, is a forum for joint discussion among Canada's ministers of the environment. Periodically, CCME conducts an environmental scan to identify emerging issues (as reported to the project team by Peter Globensky, Director General of the CCME.) This work is lead by senior assistant deputy ministers. However, the primary focus of CCME appears to be on issues that are already clearly on the agendas of the federal, provincial and territorial environmental ministries and departments rather than with new issues yet to emerge.

3.5 Ontario Experience

One of the many points of agreement in the literature on emerging issues is that they often arise from issues that are already known but, for one reason or another, their significance had not been fully recognised. In 1995 the Environmental Sciences and Standards Division (ESSD) of the MOE undertook a systematic assessment of environmental issues, based on input from over 50 members of staff from across the Ministry, the results of which were reported in Environmental Issues: Analysis and Management. This report included an identification of environmental issues, the development of comprehensive issue profiles, a determination of ecological and health impacts, an identification of management actions and effectiveness in addressing the issues, and the modification of programs and directions required. Although the report did not specifically address emerging issues it was oriented towards the future and was used by the division for establishing divisional priorities and programs.

A lesson from this exercise was that it took considerable time and effort simply to define the set of environmental issues in such a way that the results of any subsequent comparison of the issues is not pre-determined. If there is an intention to prioritise issues it is critical to define them so they are comparable. For example, it makes little sense to compare climate change with noise at the corner of Yonge and Bloor. The issues identified and classified in the ESSD exercise were: toxics, climate change, smog, depletion of the ozone layer, acid rain, eutrophication, habitat destruction, radiation, biological contamination, and noise, odour, taste, discoloration.

The ecological effects and human health impacts of each issue were examined and rated high, medium and low according to specific definitions of what these terms mean. Also, the current status was assessed of how each issue was being managed primarily in terms of the functional responsibilities of the Division.

While it became clear that the Ministry had the necessary expertise to conduct a systematic analysis of issues, current and emerging, leadership from the top is essential for developing Ministry priorities. It also requires integration with the rest of an organisation's activities otherwise, as is often the case, consideration of emerging issues tends to be one-off exercises with no lasting benefit.

It is clear from all these sources that many environmental agencies and other organisations have identified the importance of exploring emerging issues although the implementation of a formal method for doing so is often lacking. Whyte (July 1999) reviewed experience in two provinces, six countries, two US states and two international agencies and found that there is no single example of a thoroughly successful emerging issues procedure or process in use by an environmental agency anywhere in the world.

4. An Emerging Issues Procedure for the MOE

In broad terms the main features that any emerging issues procedure should have if it is to assist the MOE in the fulfilment of its mandate to protect the environment and promote conservation and stewardship:

• Capacity to draw in information on possible emerging issues from a wide variety of sources is essential.
• Top down and bottom up assessments are required.
• The net should be cast as wide as possible in terms of geography (i.e. global, continental, national, provincial and local) and have a long time horizon.
• The process for identifying and assessing the significance of emerging issues should be transparent and inclusive for reasons of credibility and comprehensiveness.
• Provision for inter-governmental and inter-Ministerial participation should be built in to the process given the cross-departmental nature of environmental issues.

If these principles are followed, it is to be expected that an enormous number and range of issues will be identified. Consequently, a filtering process will be required to narrow the range of issues and to arrive at priorities for action. Such a process should be systematic, based on explicit criteria and be repeated periodically to remain current.

4.1 Description

Such an approach to identifying and responding to emerging environmental issues was developed for the US EPA by the Environmental Futures Committee of the Science Advisory Board (January 1995). The Board's charge included the development of procedures for conducting short (5 to 10 year horizon) and long-term (20-year horizon or longer) scans of future developments that will affect environmental quality and the nation's ability to protect the environment over a medium to long-term time frame. The Board was also required to test the procedures and recommend possible actions for addressing the developments and consequences.

In the view of the project team, the approach developed by the Environmental Futures Committee of the Science Advisory Board, provides a suitable model for the MOE⁷. The major features of the early warning system model are shown in figure 1. (This figure is adapted from Science Advisory Board, January 1995.)

In the system shown in figure 1 there are three main sources of information from which emerging issues are ultimately identified:

Input sources - Potential Emerging Issues Identification:

Scenarios - top down projections of interactions of major drivers (e.g. demography, levels and patterns of economic growth, technological change, urbanisation) are examined to identify possible emerging issues using quantitative 'what-if' procedures.

Look Out Panel - a bottom up examination of possible emerging issues by a panel of specialists "who, by virtue of their experience, knowledge, and observation, perceive incipient problems and nascent opportunities." (Science Advisory Board, January 1995, p.15.)

Scanning - involves literature reviews, analysis of quantitative data bases, and co-ordination with other agencies to identify emerging issues, which for environmental issues is very significant given that these issues cut across the mandates of many departments.

Sorting, Definition, Documentation - this step has been introduced by the project team to make explicit the need to sort all of the information from the scenarios, look out panel and scanning into a set of issues that are clearly defined, analysed and compared, and for which documentation is available.

Screening - new ideas about future issues generated in the pervious steps are screened for relative importance using criteria such as: novelty, scope, severity, visibility and probability to distinguish "issues of high significance without losing sight of others that may become important later." (Science Advisory Board, January 1995, p.16.)

Expert Panel Review - a multidisciplinary panel, with a representative membership from the specialist look out panels, reviews the candidate issues and asks "Are these prospective issues likely to be real?" (Science Advisory Board, January 1995, p.17.) They may take the screening process even further. Nonetheless, similar criteria are generally applied and the underlying causes of each issue may be probed thoroughly.

Figure 1

Recommended Emerging Issues Procedure

Modelling and Analysis - issues surviving the scrutiny of screening and panel review are analysed using quantitative methods to determine their likely scope, severity, and probability as well as to define candidate policies and their costs and benefits. This work would be done by internal and external experts and set against the reference scenarios developed earlier in the process.

Implementation - refers to the initiation of policy development and resources allocation (i.e. including R & D, monitoring, standards development, program development etc.) for addressing the emerging issues that survive the panel review and become agency priorities.

Effectiveness Assessment - each iteration of the emerging issues procedure shown include an assessment of the effectiveness of the actions taken previously, he results of which are fed back as an additional source of information in the identification of potential emerging issues.

4.2 Testing the Emerging Issues Procedure: an Acid Rain Retrospective

The value to MOE of implementing a formal emerging issues procedure can only really be determined after it is has been tested in practice over a period of time and carefully evaluated. An alternative means of assessing effectiveness test is to apply it post hoc to an environmental issue which has emerged and to compare how the past responses, especially those of the Ministry of the Environment, might have been different, if at all, had the recommended procedure been in place. Such a retrospective assessment is described in Annex 2 where it is concluded that if a formal emerging issues procedure had been in place in Ontario in the late 1960s, one or more impacts of acid rain would likely have been identified as a priority emerging issue. Accordingly, reactive measures could have been undertaken which would have yielded benefits to Ontario. Prior to this time, such a process may have been ineffective, at least in terms of acid rain. Low public awareness, concern and activism with respect to environmental issues would have been a significant barrier. Given that public awareness, concern and activism are now likely permanent features of Ontario, a systematic approach to emerging issues would likely identify an emerging issue like acid rain if such a procedure were in place and was functioning effectively.

5. Implementation of an Emerging Issues Procedure in the MOE

The purpose of this section is to examine a few key issues and considerations relevant to the implementation of an emerging issues procedure in the MOE, using the same categories of issues introduced earlier (i.e. purpose/goals, scope, methodology and implementation.) As well, recommendations are offered on these key issues based on the project team's environmental expertise and knowledge of the MOE mandate and capabilities. These recommendations are designed to tailor the application of the US EPA methodology to the MOE.

5.1 Purpose/Goals

To be relevant and useful to the MOE an emerging issues procedure must help the Ministry realise its vision (MOE Business Plan: 2000-2001.)

"The vision of the Ministry of the Environment is an Ontario where human health, ecosystems, recreation, commerce and industry are sustained by clean air, water and land.

"To fulfil this vision, the ministry sets clear policies, standards and rules to protect the environment and to encourage conservation activities. Along with monitoring the environment and enforcing these rules, the ministry looks for innovative approaches to complement legislation and regulations. These include working with communities, industries and organizations towards finding flexible, practical, cost-effective ways to strengthen environmental protection and conservation efforts.

"A healthy, natural environment is vital to the well-being of our families. We play an important role in making this province the best jurisdiction in North America in which to live, work and raise a family by providing better, stronger and clearer environmental protection."

To realise this vision the MOE has to address not just the problems and issues that are pressing today, but must also look ahead at those that may require attention in the future. The purpose and goal of introducing an emerging issues procedure into the MOE is to anticipate and take early action on issues that may have negative environmental and health impacts in Ontario.

5.2 Scope

The scope of an emerging issues initiative in the MOE should be limited to the mandate of the Ministry but not strictly so. Other agencies with related mandates at the federal, provincial, and local levels may embark on similar emerging issue exercises, in which case the MOE should share experiences and findings so that all can gain from sharing views of the future.

A second scoping consideration is that the emerging issues procedure should be related to the specific functions that the MOE performs. These include science (research, ecological monitoring, health monitoring), technology assessment, policy development, program development, standard setting, source monitoring, implementation, and reporting. In other words, the procedure should be used to identify emerging issues relevant to the functional responsibilities of the Ministry. This will make it easier for the identification of an emerging issue to lead to appropriate action if any is required.

Within this context, the time horizon for exploring emerging issues may well differ according to the function in question. For example, the identification of emerging environmental threats should look 20 or more years into the future since it is not uncommon for 20 years to pass between early identification and remedial action (e.g. CFCs and acid rain.) However, a much shorter time horizon makes sense for standard setting where it may well be sufficient to look three to five years ahead so that the MOE can systematically plan its standards development activities.

Figure 2 shows the relationship between MOE function, current lead division and suggested time horizons for considering emerging issues.

5.3 Methodology

The project team reiterates its recommendation that the methodology proposed for the US EPA, as outlined in figure 1 on page 23 above.

5.4 Implementation

The US EPA model also addresses several process issues with the proposal for expert panels and stakeholder involvement that are appropriate for Ontario. In addition to these considerations, the project team has several recommendations that address matters of particular concern to the MOE.

The emerging issues procedure should draw extensively on the considerable expertise that exists throughout the MOE, similar to the process that was used for Environmental Issues: Analysis and Management (1995). Any new work on emerging issues should be transparent and should involve external stakeholders and the general public.

Figure 2 Time Horizons for Emerging Issues

One of the concerns that an organisation like the MOE is bound to have relating to emerging issues is that as soon as an emerging issue is identified it can and will lead to unrealistic public and political expectations for action. This outcome is a very real risk for two reasons. First of all, there is a high sensitivity to environmental issues in Ontario. Even when such issues fade from the so-called 'top of mind lists' there remains a strong under current of public interest in the environment. Secondly, this interest is nurtured by Ontario's many environmental groups and through the office of the Environmental Commissioner such that the actions of the MOE are subject to a level of public scrutiny unparalleled except perhaps for health issues.

The best antidotes to an agenda being unduly driven by a consideration of emerging issues are i) to involve the broadest possible group in the process so that they understand the uncertainties involved and that not all emerging issues require early action beyond a watching brief, and some not even that and ii) to apply a systematic and transparent evaluation process for prioritizing action on emerging issues. Also, by relating emerging issues to functional activities within MOE there is more likelihood that appropriate action will follow from the identification of emerging issues. Nevertheless, there is a real danger that emerging issues may distract attention and divert resources away from more mature issues in a way that is not in the public interest. It will require strong leadership to ensure that this does not happen.

Another agenda setting issue that the implementation of a formal emerging issues procedure must confront is the possible internal resistance to the outcomes of the process in so far as it has implications for resource allocation within the MOE. Public servants are naturally reluctant to turn over any aspect of their responsibilities to a procedure over which they have very little control.

The final consideration on implementation is how the emerging issues function should be managed within the MOE. Much of the necessary technical expertise already exists in the MOE. It is possible that no new technical experts will be required in the MOE for the proposed emerging issues process providing time is available for existing staff to keep up to date with new developments in their field. This includes time spent reading the scientific literature, communicating with peers, attending conferences, publishing papers and so on. What will likely be required is a small number of people able to co-ordinate the issues (current and emerging) analysis program, augmented by the expert panel as described above.

It is crucial to recognise that its success will require, depend on and engender a cultural change with the Ministry. The consideration of emerging issues through a procedure that is open, transparent, systematic and analytical will have ramifications for the activities of the Ministry. For example, the Ministry will be more accountable than ever to a public that is increasingly more informed about environmental issues. Ministry priorities will be subject to greater inspection and review, not just by those participating in the emerging issues procedure, but also by many others who will be able to examine the material generated by the procedure. This material will show the range of real, possible and imagined environmental issues facing Ontario and the rationale for determining what action, if any is required for each of them.

Over the years the MOE has employed quantitative methods based in the natural and social sciences to analyse specific environmental issues. However, such analyses have largely been issue specific, designed to assist in determining the best course of action for a particular problem. An emerging issues procedure will extend the application of these methods to many issues for comparative purposes to assist the Ministry in setting priorities. Perhaps the single greatest impact on the Ministry of implementing an emerging issues procedure of the type described in this report will come from adopting a future-oriented, proactive and preventative outlook. In addition to responding to well-established issues, the Ministry will have to learn along with others how to address issues about which there is much greater uncertainty but where the gains from carefully chosen early action can be considerable.

6. Conclusion

This report has shown that for some time there has been considerable interest among organisations in ways and means of identifying and addressing emerging environmental issues. Advanced warning of important issues can yield environmental and economic gains, as illustrated by the retrospective look at acid rain issues of the 1960s and 70s as presented in Annex 2. The Ministry of the Environment has traditionally relied on its staff to alert it to new issues requiring attention but it has not employed a regular, systematic, formal approach to identifying and managing emerging issues.

While no organisation has developed and implemented an ideal system, there does exist, in the work of the US EPA Science Advisory Board, at least one well documented and detailed account of a practical emerging issues procedure that could be of value to the Ministry of the Environment as specifically outlined in detail in section 4.

References

American Industrial Hygiene Association. "Emerging Issues in Risk Assessment."
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.aiha.org/aihce00/handouts/RT24fehren.html

Ashley, W.c. and Morrison, J.C. "Anticipatory Management Tools for the 21st Century."
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.horozon.unc.edu/courses/papers/AntiMgt

B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. "Business Plan 1999-2001. Strategies for a Healthy Environment." May, 1999.

British Antarctic Survey.
Internet. November 11, 2000. www.antarctica.ac.uk/Key_Topics/Ozone/Ozone.html

Brown, W. "And now, here is the technology forecast." New Scientist. July 10, 1993

Edward, P.N. "Global Comprehensive Models in Politics and Policymaking." Climatic Change. Vol. 32 No. 2. (February 1996): 149-161

Encyclopaedia Britannica. "Rowland, F. Sherwood"
Internet. November, 12 2000. www.britannica.com/seo/f/f-sherwood-rowland/ and other related sites

Environment Canada. "2000-2001 Estimates Part III. A Report on Plans and Priorities."
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.ec.gc.ca/rpp/rpp_e.pdf

Environment Canada. "1999-2000 Estimates. A Report on Plans and Priorities."
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.ec.gc.ca/rpp/1999/rpp_e.pdf

Environmental Science and Standards Division, Ministry of Environment and Energy.
Environmental Issues: Analysis and Management. December, 1995

Goodstein, E.S., Economics and the Environment, Second Edition. Prentice-Hall. New Jersey. 1999

Munn, R.E., Whyte, A. and Timmerman, P. "Emerging Environmental Issues: A Global Perspective of SCOPE." Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment Vol. XXVII, No. 6. (September, 1999): 464-471

Munn, R.E., Whyte, A. and Timmerman, P. Managing Emerging Issues: An Approach for the Ministry of the Environment. Final Report. January 2000

Munn. R.E. editor. Report of a May 14, 1999 Workshop on Emerging Environmental Issues in Ontario. November 19, 1999. Sponsored by the Integrated Environmental Planning Division, Ontario Ministry of the Environment.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment. "1999-2000 Business Plan."
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.gov.on.ca/mbs/english/press99/env.html

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. "The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Megascience Forum. Workshop on Global-Scale Issues." Paris, France, 1998.
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.oecd.org

Parson, E.A. "Integrated Assessment and Environmental Policymaking in Pursuit of Usefulness." Energy Policy. Vol.23, No. 4/5. (April/May, 1995): 463-475

Parson, E.A. "Environmental Trends and Environmental Governance in Canada." Canadian Public Policy, Special Supplement on the Trends Project. (August, 2000): S123-S143

Pittock, A.B. "The Question of Significance." Nature Vol. 397. (25 february, 1999): 657- 658

Sampler, V.A. "Keeping Our Eye On The Ball: The Strategic Role of the Policy Analysis Staff in Advancing the Conservation Mission of the Forest Service."
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.fs.fed.us/policy/000218_Sample.htm

Shell Canada
Internet. http://www.shell.com/royal-en/

United Nations Environment Program. EarthScan. Global Environmental Outlook 2000

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Beyond the Horizon: Using Foresight to
protect the Environmental Future. Washington: SAB, 1995
14.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. SAB Report: Futures, Methods and Issues. A Technical Annex to Beyond the Horizon: Using Foresight to protect the Environmental Future. Washington: SAB, 1995

United States Environmental Protection Agency. Fiscal Year 199-2000 Great Lakes Priorities and Funding Guidance.
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/99prior_guid.html 15.

United States Environmental Protection Agency. "Benefits of the CFC Phaseout"
Internet. November 11, 2000. www.epa.gov/geninfo/benefits.html

University of Toledo. Campus Safety, Health and Environmental Management Association (CSHEMA). Report of the 199 CSHEMA Emerging Issues Forum
Internet. October 20, 2000. www.safety.utoledo.edu/cshema/CSHEMAEmerging Issues9au99.html

Whyte A. Emerging Environmental Issues: A Review of International Experience in Foresight. Final Report to Ontario Ministry of the Environment. July, 1999

List of People Interviewed

• Brody, M., US EPA, Senior Scientist, Planning, Analysis, Accountability Office
• Globensky, P., Director General, CCME
• Griffiths C., ADM Operations Division, Ministry of the Environment
• Kulak, L., Director Environment, Health and Safety, Shell Canada
• Rosen, M., Acting Director, Division of Science, Research and Technology, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
• Slater, R., Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Environment Canada

Annex 1: The Discovery of CFCs in the 1970s as a Threat to the Ozone Layer

British climatologists have been measuring the ozone layer above Antarctica since 1957. In 1970 a Dutch scientist P. Crutzen called attention to the vulnerability of the ozone layer. He showed that nitrogen oxides act as catalysts to speed the decomposition of ozone. A year later the American Harold Johnston warned that commercial supersonic transport aircraft would release nitrogen oxides directly into the ozone layer and thus could damage it.

The next alert came in 1974, when Rowland and Molina published a study in Nature of the threat posed by (CFC) gases to the ozone layer. They theorised that CFCs could deplete the stratospheric ozone layer. This would expose all living things to increased amounts of UV radiation possibly causing an increased incidence of skin cancer and cataracts, a weakening of the human immune system, and damage to plant and animal life. Their paper, which later earned them, with Crutzen, the Nobel prize in chemistry, gained considerable news coverage including the front page of the New York Times. In 1976 the U.S. National Academy of Sciences concurred with their view and in 1978 CFC-based aerosols were banned in the United States.

By the mid 1980's there was sufficient evidence to convince scientists world wide that there was indeed a "hole in the ozone layer" over Antarctica. Action was fairly swift after that point. In 1985 the Vienna Convention of the Ozone Layer was signed dealing primarily with co-operation on research. Then in 1987 twenty-four countries signed the Montreal Protocol to Protect Against Atmospheric Ozone reduction. The Protocol called for a 50% reduction in the production of CFCs over ten-years with some concessions to developing countries. The Protocol was revised in 1990 to set up a fund of US$260 million to finance the adjustment to CFC replacements in poor countries and to completely ban the production of CFCs by 2000. In 1992, the Protocol was again revised to eliminate CFC production by 1996 and the compensation fund was increased to US$500 million.

For its part, from 1990 -1994 Ontario introduced a series of regulations specifically dealing with the production, use and disposal of CFCs and other ozone depleting substances:

• Ozone Depleting Substances - General Regulation (1990)
• Refrigerants Regulation (1994)
• Halon Ffire Extinguishing Equipment Rregulation (1994)
• Solvents Rregulation (1994)
• Sterilants Rregulation (1994)

Recently some of the dates specified in these regulations have been extended for short-periods, but overall, Ontario kept pace with other Canadian jurisdictions and jurisdictions in other developed countries in controlling and/or eliminating the release of CFCs and other ozone depleting substances.

Annex 2: A Retrospective Look at Acid Rain as an Emerging Issue of the 1960s

In this Annex, the emerging issues procedure described in section 4 is applied, retrospectively to acid rain. The purpose of doing this is to consider whether the acid rain issue might have been identified earlier and responded to more quickly and more cost-effectively had the proposed emerging issues procedure been in place in the 1960s in Ontario.

Acid rain first gained prominence in Canada in the late 1970s. For the purposes of this case test, the recommended emerging issues procedure has been assumed to have been in place in the late 1960s, approximately 5 to 10 years preceding the recognition of acid rain in Ontario.

As described in section 5 the emerging issues procedure consists of eight tasks or steps. What each of these tasks might have entailed and what the outcome might have been are examined in the context of the acid rain issue.

i) Scenarios - These high-level scenarios are shaped by "drivers" (i.e., external factors expected to have overriding influence on future outcomes.) For the purposes of this test, four drivers are included: population growth, technological developments, economic factors and environmental awareness. As well, two scenarios are tested.

In the late 1960s, all projections of population growth in Ontario, Canada and globally showed positive growth, the question was rate of growth, not whether positive growth would occur. An expanding population implied expanding demand both domestically and internationally for raw materials and manufactured goods. In other words, the potential for industrial air emissions to increase, and likely significantly so, was clear. While technological developments were viewed by many as being the means to access new resources and to improve the efficiency of production, overall, the level of pollution production was expected to increase. The primary uncertainty related to the rate at which technological advances would occur and what unexpected new technologies would emerge. Looking back, despite the information technology revolution, most of the traditional primary industrial activities remained a central part of Ontario's economy and economic expansion occurred as expected. In other words, the current economic situation with respect to traditional industrial activities, which account for many acidifying emissions, was largely predictable in the late 1960s. A key uncertainty was the potential for new pollution control technologies to emerge which would significantly reduce the cost and increase the effectiveness of pollution abatement.

Perhaps the most difficult driver to have forecast at that time was the rapid change in public awareness regarding environmental issues. The environment and public activism were only beginning to emerge as major social and political factors. Likely, any foresight exercise in the late 1960s would have placed a wide range on this potential trend and would likely have underestimated its eventual significance.

Taking all of this into account, it is unlikely that a "top down" scenario exercise would have specifically identified acid rain as an emerging issue. What is likely is that increases in industrial pollutant emissions, and in particular air emissions, would have been predicted. As well, the costs of pollution reduction, using well-known technologies, could have been reasonably well estimated (at least for making policy decisions.) On this basis, high and low scenarios would both likely have projected increasing air emissions, though by substantially different amounts, with differences due to public and governmental concern leading to major pollution reduction investments. In summary, scenario analysis in the 1960s would probably have revealed increases in industrial air emissions but, much less likely, the emergence of acid rain as an issue.

ii) Look Out Panel - This exercise would have involved experts from a wide range of discrete disciplines. If such a panel had been in place, experts would have been involved with experience relating to those environmental receptors associated with acid rain, in particular human health, fisheries, forestry and agriculture. The impact of poor air quality on human health has long been recognized, well before the late 1960s. What was not fully comprehended was the limited degree to which effect thresholds (i.e., concentrations below which no effects occur) existed. Epidemiologists had yet to investigate extensively sub-acute effects. This being said, whether the health effects of acid rain (which now are recognized to comprise a significant portion of the total damages) would have been identified as an emerging issue is uncertain. This issue may only have appeared in a pessimistic forecast with a low or no effect threshold for sub-acute illnesses.

With respect to impacts on the natural environment, most attention up to this point had been on direct fumigation damages (e.g., the deforestation surrounding Sudbury) and associated heavy metal contamination. Nonetheless, the basic knowledge of lake and soil chemistry that would form the basis for predictive models of acid rain impacts in the 1970s and 1980's was well known for many decades prior to the late 1960s. In hindsight, what was missing was a comprehensive systematic analysis of the expected impacts on plants, soil and water. Each natural science discipline (e.g., forestry, limnology, geology, atmospheric science) was largely isolated and focused on narrow pieces of the problem. Had a systematic analysis been undertaken, significant impacts on soil and water chemistry could have been predicted based on existing and projected emissions. In the absence of such an analytical process having been undertaken, acid rain damages on one or more ecosystem components would likely not have emerged from this component of the procedure. At this time, the focus was on "hot spots" of contamination (e.g., mercury releases.)

Even if suspicions had been raised about acid rain, what would have been missing is direct evidence of the widespread existence of these chemical and ecological impacts (i.e. the concept that these impacts were not only locally significant but due to long range transport and cumulative effects, were regionally significant as well.) Notably, this remains the case today with respect to some types of damage (e.g., forests soils and agricultural damage.) In summary, the impacts of acidifying emissions on natural ecosystems might have been identified as an emerging issue in the late 1960s from by a Look Out Panel. The potential for these impacts to occur cumulatively over extensive areas causing significant damages due to long-range transport would likely not have been identified even though these impacts were predictable using the available extant knowledge. The primary barrier was the absence of a multidisciplinary forum with adequate funds to undertake a comprehensive, systematic analysis.

iii) Scanning - The first published evidence of acid rain damages on the natural environment appeared in the late 1960s based on Scandinavian research. While specialists in Canadian research institutions were aware of these publications, this awareness was quite limited. If a systematic scanning process had been in place with the results feeding into a formal procedure these articles would likely have gained earlier attention in Canada.

iv) Sorting, Definition, Documentation - Acid rain involves a broad range of impacts ranging from human health to damages to human structures to degradation of ecosystems. How these impacts would have been categorized prior to undergoing screening would depend on the nature of the other emerging issues identified. Given the number of different types of impacts caused by acid rain, a strong possibility exists that acid rain would be identified as not one emerging issue but would be identified as a series of emerging issues.

This observation has relevance for implementing this sorting step. The purpose of sorting is to ensure as apples-to-apples comparison is undertaken in evaluating potential emerging issues. However, in the case of acid rain, the causal factor is common among multiple emerging issues. Any sorting and screening of potential emerging issues will need to reflect the existence of common causal factors linking different types of issues.

v) Screening - Based on the knowledge extant in the late 1960s, at least one of the impacts of acidifying emissions (in particular, sulphur dioxide) on the natural environment would likely have been included on a potential list of emerging issues. Would one or more of these potential issues have survived a systematic screening process? To answer this question definitively, one would need to develop a comprehensive list of all of the potential emerging issues at that time. Acid rain would then need to be subjected to these criteria alongside other contemporary competing issues. Nonetheless, applying the following six screening criteria to the acid rain issue does provide some insight in this regard:

1. Timing - As to the timing when the acid rain issue could be expected to emerge as a high priority issue, this would have been difficult to predict. Given that acid rain impacts had been occurring for decades previously without widespread public alarm, the potential existed for the issue to continue to simmer on the backburner. What was clearly evident was that early recognition and remedy were important given the extensive area affected and the irreversibility of some of the impacts. On this basis, acid rain would have scored high with respect to this criterion.
    
2. Novelty - The impact of air pollutants, and in particular sulphur dioxide, on the natural environment, especially forests, was not news in the late 1960s. Sudbury provided graphic evidence. As well, these impacts were known to extend downwind for many kilometres. What was largely unknown was the phenomenon of long-range transport of pollutants. It is not clear, however, to what extent long-range transport would likely have been identified in the late 1960s. Long-range transport may have been identified from the Scandinavian experience but potential long-distance causal factors were considered to be highly speculative at that time. Overall, acid rain would likely not have scored high with respect to this criterion.
    
3. Scope - Sulphur dioxide emissions were known to have downwind impacts. Few scientists knew or suspected that the impacts were evident hundreds or even thousands of kilometers downwind. Likely acid rain would have received a moderate score with respect this criterion. The major focus at that time was on specific pollutants (e.g., mercury, DDT) which were biologically active and accumulated up the food chain. These contaminants were feared to have wide ranging impacts.
    
4. Severity - Many impacts of acid rain on aquatic and terrestrial systems could have been predicted in the late 1960s. However, no systematic analyses comparable to those undertaken in the 1980's and subsequently, had been attempted. A high rating for this criterion would have been contingent on some systematic quantitative forecasting having been undertaken. Such analyses would only have been prescribed if one or more impacts of acid rain passed this screening phase. Until this occurred, acid rain impacts would score moderately or low with respect to this criterion.
    
5. Visibility - Given the social and economic importance of forest and aquatic ecosystems in Ontario, the potential existed for a high level of concern regarding acid rain impacts. This concern, however, would hinge largely on the expected magnitude of the impacts. A moderate to high score for this criterion would have been reasonable for most acid rain impacts.
    
6. Probability - The chemistry of sulphur dioxide in the environment was fairly well understood in the late 1960s. Basic mass/balance logic leads inevitably to the conclusion that chemical and ecological alterations of the natural environment were virtually certain. Despite this, the U.S. maintained for a number of years that not enough was known about acid rain to take action. The U.S., however, did not claim no effect; instead, they claimed the effect was too uncertain to choose the best course of action. Depending on the interpretation of this criterion, a high or low rating may have been indicated.

Whether impacts from acid rain, or more likely sulphur dioxide emissions would have passed the screening phase is thus difficult to conclude definitively. Certainly, various impacts of acid rain would have been identified as being potential candidates to become an emerging issue.

vi) Expert Panel Review - If acid rain had passed the screening phase and was placed before a panel of experts in terrestrial and aquatic ecology and resource or environmental economics, its potential significance would likely have been confirmed. Basic knowledge of soil chemistry and the impact of reduced pH on plant growth and aquatic ecosystems predates the late 1960s by many decades. Direct impingement impacts and acid pulse impacts during the spring freshette may have been overlooked but informed natural scientists would probably have concluded that acidification of terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems would have significant negative consequences. The major issue would have been the relative significance of these impacts compared to others emerging in the 1960s. Pivotal to this determination would have been the recognition of the long-range transport phenomenon.

vii) Modelling and Analysis - Systematic analyses of the physical, ecological and economic impacts of acid rain were undertaken in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980's. While part of these assessments built on recent research results relating to acid rain, the literature (in terms of hard facts) was sparse at this point in time. These quantitative assessments were based mostly on well-developed chemical and ecological principles, not tied directly to acid rain. For this reason, had the impetus and funding for these studies been available in the late 1960s, similar assessments demonstrating the potential for large impacts would have been possible. In other words, if a formal emerging issues procedure had been in place and the impacts of acid rain had been analyzed systematically at that time, the rough magnitude of the impacts would likely have been revealed. Human health impacts may not have been included in this assessment for the reasons explained.

viii) Implementation - If action on acid rain has been deemed appropriate in the late 1960s what types of actions would likely have been taken? What would the effect of these actions likely have been?

Many of the actions taken since the late 1970s, when acid rain was first identified as a priority, could have been initiated 10 years earlier. Given the ecological improvements which appear to be occurring in some areas due to reduced acid rain loading (e.g. in and around Sudbury), earlier action could have prevented the extinction of fish stocks in some lakes and could have reduced considerably the extensive damages which have occurred over the last thirty years. In this case, earlier action would have yielded positive benefits in terms of avoided environmental damages.

As to the specific actions which would have been undertaken, likely most, if not all, of the actions which were taken would have still been taken (e.g., monitoring, research, emissions abatement, international agreements, regulations.) The difference would have been in their timing which would have begun earlier.

Another potential outcome would have been an improved management style. Ontario, like many other jurisdictions, entered into the acid rain issue largely on the basis of limited calculations, intuition and conjecture. Not all expectations materialized and when more rigorous analytical results were produced, some of the original propositions needed to be modified or even retracted. Retraction may not be totally avoidable but a management style that starts from a more rigorous and analytically sound foundation tends to reinforce and build efficiently on extant knowledge. Overall, problems are approached in a more systematic and reliable manner.

A major benefit could have been realized had an emerging issues procedure been in place in the late 1960s. If acid rain, including its long range transport dimension, had been identified as an important environmental problem earlier on it might have led to a systematic examination of a broader range of technical options for dealing with sulphur dioxide emissions in the Sudbury area. Possibly this would have resulted in a more rapid implementation of stripping sulphur during smelting operations and avoided the intermediate reliance on dispersion through taller stacks which transformed a local environmental problem into a regional problem.

Hindsight is always more reliable than foresight so that one cannot be sure that an emerging issues procedure would have resulted in a more environmentally and economically sound approach to acid rain. However, this retrospective analysis does suggest that, in the case of acid rain, the necessary expertise and information might have been available for this to be a real possibility. 

1. In this report the term emerging issues procedure refers to the process and tools used for identifying and responding to emerging issues.

2. See appendix 1 for a summary of events leading up to these regulations.

3. In 1991 Nortel was the first multinational telecommunications company to eliminate CFCs from its production processes. This initiative brought the company international acclaim as well as demand for its new cleaning technology.

4. Adapted from Munn, Whyte and Timmerman (1999).

5. Source Whyte, July 1999, p. 8

6. The items have been lightly edited and adapted to apply to a provincial agency.

7. What follows is a brief overview of the model with some changes in terminology for expository purposes. For complete details see Science Advisory Board January 1995.