Toward a National Adaptation Strategy for Canada: Key insights from global peers

This report discusses how In December 2020, Canada’s federal government announced its new climate plan, A Healthy Environment and a Healthy Economy, which included a commitment to developing Canada’s first-ever national adaptation strategy (NAS). This endeavour will require careful thought, dedicated resourcing, and an approach tailored to Canada’s governance structure and adaptation needs. Recognizing that Canada has some catching up to do, the federal government can learn from international good practice and design a process that will produce an ambitious and inclusive adaptation strategy, one that protects and prepares Canadians in a changing and increasingly uncertain climate.

Global progress on the development of national adaptation strategies and plans has been steady over the last 20 years, although it is difficult to assess whether this has translated into accelerated and effective implementation on the ground. Moreover, the current financing gap, where the availability of financial resources is not keeping pace with the growing adaptation needs, risks limiting the utility and impact of adaptation planning. This dynamic is also reflected within Europe, a region that is significantly advanced in its adoption of national adaptation strategies and plans. The COVID-19 pandemic may be an inflection point for adaptation action around the world, as recovery efforts may potentially divert attention and resources away from adaptation or, conversely, usher in more resources for adaptation if deliberate and strategic linkages are made between the two agendas

Within this global and regional picture of progress, a closer look at 12 adaptation policy instruments from 11 countries provides some insights into how different countries are approaching efforts to mobilize adaptation action at the national level. The countries selected for review represent a mix of policy instruments (e.g., assessments, strategies, plans, and programs) and experience (e.g., recent vs. 10+ years). These countries are Australia, Fiji, France, Kiribati, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Africa, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The policy instruments were assessed in terms of the degree to which they addressed social inclusion, the emphasis on scientific assessments of climate vulnerability and risks, the use of detailed frameworks for prioritizing risks and adaptation solutions, the number of defined adaptation actions, the inclusion of adaptation targets and indicators, and references to progress reporting.