February 2011
Previous page | Table of Contents | Next page
The Canada-U.S. Clean Energy Dialogue (CED) is one of five program components grouped under the International Actions Theme of the Clean Air Agenda (CAA). This evaluation of the CED was conducted to inform senior management and to fulfill Treasury Board Secretariat requirements. Although it is part of the CAA International Actions Theme, the CED was evaluated separately because it was added to the theme later and had separate funding. The specific objectives of the evaluation were to determine the ongoing relevance and performance of the CED. Given the early timing of the evaluation, which occurred before the end of the CED’s second year, the focus was on program outputs and the achievement of early outcomes.
The Canada-U.S. Clean Energy Dialogue was initiated by Prime Minister Harper and President Obama at their meeting in Ottawa in February 2009. As described in the CED Action Plan, “the CED was created to enhance collaboration on the development of clean energy technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and address climate change.” In Canada, the CED is led and coordinated by Environment Canada (EC), with implementation carried out by Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), EC and Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada (DFAIT). Activities aim to increase collaboration between Canada and the U.S. in three areas: (1) developing and deploying clean energy technologies, with a focus on carbon capture and storage (CCS); (2) building a more efficient electricity grid based on clean and renewable electricity; and (3) expanding clean energy research, development and demonstration (RD&D). The CED has received $7.17 million for a two-year period from 2009–2010 through 2010–2011.
The evaluation addressed five key issues: (1) Continued need for the program; (2) Alignment with government priorities; (3) Alignment with federal roles and responsibilities; (4) Achievement of expected outcomes; and (5) Demonstrated efficiency and economy. To examine these issues, and the specific evaluation questions related to each issue, the evaluation employed two main lines of inquiry: (1) document review; and (2) key informant interviews. The evaluation was limited in its ability to comment on longer-term outcomes, as the CED had only been in place for 18 months at the time of data collection. As well, the evaluation was limited in its ability to gain access to U.S. officials and private-sector stakeholders (due to the timing of the exercise and the tight timeframe) and thus limited in its ability to obtain external perspectives on the ongoing relevance and performance of the CED.
The key findings and conclusions of the five evaluation issues for the CED include:
There is a clear need for the CED in order for Canada and the U.S. to meet international climate change needs related to clean energy technologies.
The CED clearly responds and is connected to international climate change needs, and continued work is required on clean energy technologies to address climate change, particularly in the areas of CCS, energy efficiency and renewable electricity. In addition, since Canada and the U.S. have aligned their climate change targets under the Copenhagen Accord, it is beneficial for them to work together.
The CED is clearly aligned with federal government priorities and the priorities of the participating departments.
The CED has been implemented in response to a direct commitment by Canadian and U.S. leaders and is aligned with a number of federal Throne Speeches. The CED is also aligned with the participating departments’ mandates and priorities.
There is a clear federal role to deliver on Canada-U.S. engagement; however, provinces also have an important role.
The federal government has the appropriate lead role for the CED, as activities relate to international dialogue to address transboundary/global environmental issues. However, the provinces have responsibility over most forms of energy extraction, production and use, and thus also have an important role to play. While there are other opportunities for cross-border dialogue on climate change, as well as funding for clean energy projects, these initiatives are not duplicative of the CED.
The CED has achieved its expected outputs and has demonstrated progress towards achieving its immediate outcome. As well, there is some evidence that the CED is meeting its intermediate outcome of increased collaboration on clean energy RD&D and making progress in building the foundation for compatible policy frameworks. In addition, there is some evidence that Canada’s profile as a provider of climate-friendly technologies has been raised as a result of its commitment to identify and develop clean technologies.
Outreach efforts by DFAIT were not generally seen as directly linked with the CED working groups' specific commitments; rather, they have focused on building relationships with U.S. officials and arranging meetings on behalf of the senior officials.
Two key external factors have influenced the delivery of the CED: (1) challenges in the U.S. regarding the use of private-sector advisors in government-to-government dialogues have led to a reduced role for the private sector compared to initial expectations among some Canadian partners; and (2) provincial governments maintain jurisdiction over energy production and administration of energy resources, limiting the scope of tangible federal contributions in these areas.
The evaluation also demonstrates that it would be useful to re-examine CED Action Plan recommendations to reflect the highest priorities of the Canadian and U.S. working groups, should the CED be renewed.
The CED is operating efficiently and includes a functional management structure and effective performance reporting, although improvements could be made to the collection of performance data on the progress of CED projects.
There is evidence that the CED provides good value for money, with no alternative delivery means apparent; however, some suggestions for improved efficiency were provided by interviewees. Interviewees from most groups involved in electricity grid initiatives noted the need for more engagement to move CED objectives forward. As well, improving linkages to existing funding mechanisms may help to support CED projects and related outcomes. The CED has generally been implemented as planned, but with some under-spending (21.5%) in the first year and some re-allocation of resources from the Secretariat and private-sector advisor funds to working groups. Roles and responsibilities, particularly those relating to how the external and special advisors would contribute directly to the Action Plan’s recommendations, have evolved from when the CED was first introduced.
The overall management structure—with secretariat support provided by Environment Canada—is operating efficiently and is achieving expected results. The CED Secretariat has been collecting information and reporting on its performance, producing two high-profile Report to Leaders documents as planned. However, improvements are required for the collection of accurate and ongoing performance data on the progress of projects recommended in the Action Plan. Different views were noted on the balance of resources between the Secretariat and the working groups. Ultimately, the allocation should be based on allotted roles and responsibilities, which should be reviewed and/or confirmed if the program is renewed.
While there is acknowledgement among staff members from both EC and NRCan as well as working group members, advisors and other stakeholders that the mandate of the CED could fit within NRCan, there is general agreement among interviewees that the CED is functioning effectively under EC’s direction.
The following recommendations were developed based on the findings and conclusions and are directed to the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) of the International Affairs Branch at EC, the ADM of the Science & Policy Integration Branch at NRCan and the ADM of the North America Branch at DFAIT. Should the program be renewed, it is recommended:
1.0 That EC, as lead and in consultation with NRCan and DFAIT, explore linkages between the CED and existing funding mechanisms to maximize synergies and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the CED in meeting Action Plan recommendations.
The evaluation demonstrated that there is a continued need for the CED in order to meet key international climate change challenges and to align Canadian and U.S. responses to climate change. However, the CED is not a funding mechanism per se and each CED project must rely on other program funding for significant investments. While progress has been made in most recommended areas, improving the linkages to existing funding mechanisms may further help to move CED initiatives forward. As well, there is an opportunity for the CED both to inform and to be informed by the investment choices of other programs involved in clean energy through these connections. Therefore, it would be beneficial for the CED to explore possible avenues to connect with existing funding mechanisms.
2.0 That NRCan, as lead and in consultation with EC, consider ways to enhance the level of engagement with provincial partners to advance CED objectives.
It would be beneficial for the CED working groups to assess the appropriate level of engagement with external partners. In particular, given the provinces’ responsibility for electricity generation, it would be advantageous for the Electricity Grid Working Group to re-examine its level of engagement with provincial partners to facilitate more active federal-provincial dialogue. While the Electricity Grid Working Group views the CED conferences as sufficient avenues for domestic consultations, interviewees from most other groups involved in electricity grid initiatives (e.g., provincial representatives, advisors, program staff) noted the need for more engagement. There would be value added, therefore, in the Electricity Grid Working Group clarifying the needs of its members and working to enhance the level of their engagement with provinces. This would facilitate moving CED objectives forward in this focus area.
3.0 That EC, as lead and in consultation with NRCan and DFAIT as appropriate, clarify, document and communicate the roles and responsibilities of all key players involved.
The evaluation found that the roles and responsibilities for key players in the CED need to be more clearly defined and communicated. For example, there needs to be more clarity around the roles and responsibilities of the CED Secretariat and NRCan’s coordinating function for providing support to the Working Groups. As well, the roles and responsibilities of the working groups themselves need to be clarified and understood by all those involved, particularly with respect to planning and reporting requirements. For some of the key players in the CED, roles and responsibilities have evolved over the course of the first year of implementation. For example, the use of external advisors in implementing the CED has been reduced, and expectations for these private-sector partners need to be reviewed and adjusted accordingly. In addition, the outreach role of the DFAIT Special Advisor shifted as the CED’s focus moved to clean energy technology cooperation.
Discussing and documenting the roles for all key Canadian players of the CED, therefore, will ensure a clearer understanding of their responsibilities and of what each one can contribute. In order to meet CED objectives, it would also be beneficial to identify the connections across key players and the support that can be expected. A clear plan for communicating these roles and responsibilities should also be developed and implemented to ensure increased awareness among all key players.
4.0 That EC, as lead and in consultation with NRCan and DFAIT as appropriate, develop detailed workplans and implement mechanisms to ensure the ongoing and accurate collection of performance data on the progress of CED projects, including reporting requirements and timelines.
While the evaluation found that mechanisms have been developed to report on the progress of CED projects recommended in the Action Plan (e.g., project tracking matrix and project information sheets), these are insufficient in providing complete, accurate data on progress towards achieving CED objectives. These tools for monitoring project progress were not always complete and did not provide sufficient information to constitute comprehensive work planning for each Action Plan recommendation. This made it difficult to fully and accurately assess the performance of the CED, particularly its progress towards achieving expected outcomes. Therefore, should funding be renewed, it would be beneficial for each Working Group to develop detailed workplans for their respective recommended projects at the outset of each initiative, including identified deliverables, milestones and timelines where appropriate. The CED Secretariat, along with those responsible for the coordination of CED activities at NRCan, should work to develop and implement mechanisms that will facilitate the ongoing collection of performance data by each working group. As well, the development of an overall CED-level workplan would be beneficial in facilitating and communicating these requirements to all those involved. The objective should be to provide complete, timely, meaningful and accurate performance data that fulfil departmental reporting requirements and inform decision making without resulting in an excessive response burden for the working groups.
The following recommendations were developed based on the findings and conclusions and are directed to the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) of the International Affairs Branch at Environment Canada, the ADM of the Science & Policy Integration Sector at NRCan and the ADM of Americas at DFAIT. Should the program be renewed, it is recommended:
1.
That Environment Canada, as lead and in consultation with NRCan and DFAIT, explore linkages between the CED and existing funding mechanisms to maximize synergies and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the CED in meeting Action Plan recommendations.
The evaluation demonstrated that there is a continued need for the CED to meet key international climate change challenges and to align Canadian and U.S. responses to climate change. However, CED is not a funding mechanism per se and each CED project must rely on other program funding for significant investments. While progress has been made in most recommended areas, improving the linkages to existing funding mechanisms may further help to move CED initiatives forward. As well, there is an opportunity for the CED to both inform and be informed by the investment choices of other programs involved in clean energy through these connections. Therefore, it would be beneficial for the CED to explore possible avenues to connect with existing funding mechanisms.
The ADMs of the International Affairs Branch and the Science & Technology Branch at Environment Canada, the ADMs of the Energy Sector, the Innovation & Energy Technology Sector and the Science & Policy Integration Sector at NRCan, and the ADM of Americas at DFAIT agree with the recommendation.
Recognizing the need to deliver tangible results and make best use of limited resources, the CED Secretariat has reallocated resources in order to provide greater support for CED projects. Moving forward, the CED Secretariat will ensure there is proper balance between the funding of the Secretariat, the working groups and DFAIT CED outreach activities in the U.S.
Linking the CED with existing funding mechanisms, where appropriate, would help to improve the effectiveness of the CED. Therefore, Environment Canada, NRCan and DFAIT commit to explore possible opportunities to link the CED to other funding sources within their departments and beyond. An overall report on how the CED could be linked to existing funding mechanisms will be written by the Secretariat, in collaboration with working groups, and submitted to the Deputy Ministers of NRCan and Environment Canada.
Spring 2011
- DG-level meeting between Environment Canada and NRCan to discuss potential CED linkages to clean energy funding mechanisms
Spring 2011
- Report to DMs of Environment Canada and NRCan on possible funding resources to support CED-related initiatives
2.
That NRCan, as lead and in consultation with Environment Canada, consider ways to enhance the level of engagement with provincial partners to advance CED objectives.
It would be beneficial for the CED working groups to assess the appropriate level of engagement with external partners. In particular, given the provincial responsibility in electricity generation, it would be advantageous for the Electricity Grid Working Group to re-examine their level of engagement with provincial partners to facilitate more active federal-provincial dialogue. While the Electricity Grid Working Group view the CED conferences as sufficient avenues for domestic consultations, interviewees from most other groups involved in electricity grid initiatives (e.g., provincial representatives, advisors, program staff) noted the need for more engagement. There would be value added, therefore, for the Electricity Grid Working Group to clarify the needs of working group members and work to enhance the level of its engagement with provinces. This would facilitate moving CED objectives forward in this focus area.
The ADMs of the International Affairs Branch and the Science & Technology Branch at Environment Canada, the ADMs of the Energy Sector, the Innovation & Energy Technology Sector and the Science & Policy Integration Sector at NRCan, and the ADM of Americas at DFAIT agree with the recommendation.
Increased provincial participation in activities of the Electricity Grid Working Group is welcomed and, going forward, opportunities will continue to be provided for provincial engagement in various CED events.
NRCan’s ADM of the Energy Sector, and Canadian co-chair of the Electricity Grid Working Group, commits to convening regular conference calls with interested provincial officials to provide an update on the work of the Electricity Grid Working Group. A teleconference was held in November 2010 and provided an opportunity to highlight the upcoming Smart Grid Conference (in January 2011) and discuss next steps and opportunities for greater project collaboration.
In addition, both NRCan and Environment Canada will continue to make efforts to provide periodic updates on the CED at appropriate federal/provincial/territorial meetings that touch on climate change and clean energy policy issues. For example, NRCan has been providing updates to provincial/territorial Energy Ministers through the annual Energy and Mines Ministers Conference, while Environment Canada has provided updates through regular federal/provincial/territorial meetings focused on international climate change negotiations.
Winter 2011
- Coordinate regular calls with provincial officials interested in the Electricity Grid Working Group
Winter 2011
- Ensure that updates on CED are provided at regular meetings between federal and provincial/territorial officials on climate change and clean energy issues
3.
That Environment Canada, as lead and in consultation with NRCan and DFAIT as appropriate, clarify, document and communicate the roles and responsibilities of all key players involved.
The evaluation found that the roles and responsibilities for key players in the CED need to be more clearly defined and communicated. For example, there needs to be more clarity around the roles and responsibilities of the CED Secretariat and NRCan’s coordinating function for providing support to the working groups. As well, the roles and responsibilities of the working groups themselves need to be clarified and understood by all those involved, particularly with respect to planning and reporting requirements. For some of the key players in the CED, roles and responsibilities have evolved over the course of the first year of implementation. For example, the use of external advisors in implementing the CED has been reduced and expectations for these private sector partners need to be reviewed and adjusted accordingly. In addition, the outreach role of the DFAIT special advisor shifted as the CED’s focus moved to clean energy technology cooperation.
Discussing and documenting the roles for all key Canadian players of the CED, therefore, will ensure a clearer understanding of the responsibilities and contributions that each can make. It would also be beneficial to identify the connections across key players and the support that can be expected to meet CED objectives. A clear plan for communicating these roles and responsibilities should also be developed and implemented to ensure increased awareness among all key players.
The ADMs of the International Affairs Branch and the Science & Technology Branch at Environment Canada, the ADMs of the Energy Sector, the Innovation & Energy Technology Sector and the Science & Policy Integration Sector at NRCan, and the ADM of Americas at DFAIT agree with the recommendation.
Steps have been taken to clarify roles and responsibilities of key CED players. In April 2010, Deputies asked that CED commitments, including roles and responsibilities, be included in the executive performance agreements of the ADMs involved with the CED. Further efforts to define and communicate roles and responsibilities of key CED players will be made.
The CED Secretariat and Canadian Working Group Co-Chairs will re-examine the roles of private sector advisors and inform them of their expected roles moving forward. The Secretariat will hold regular discussions among key CED players, and, in collaboration with working groups, will develop an organizational chart, a contact list and an approval process chart to help increase the awareness of roles and responsibilities of key CED players.
Winter 2011
- Clarify expectations for private sector advisors (each working group to review need for private sector involvement)
Roles will be communicated to the private sector advisors by the appropriate officials
Winter 2011
- Regular discussions between Working Group Co-Chairs, Secretariat leads, and DFAIT special advisor
Winter 2011
- Development of a CED organizational chart, a contact list and an approval process chart
4.
That Environment Canada, as lead and in consultation with NRCan and DFAIT as appropriate, develop detailed workplans and implement mechanisms to ensure the ongoing and accurate collection of performance data on the progress of CED projects, including reporting requirements and timelines.
While the evaluation found that mechanisms have been developed to report on the progress of CED projects recommended in the Action Plan (e.g., project tracking matrix and project information sheets), these are insufficient in providing accurate and fulsome data on progress towards achieving CED objectives. These tools for monitoring project progress were not always complete and did not provide sufficient information to constitute comprehensive work planning for each Action Plan recommendation. This made it difficult to fully and accurately assess the performance of the CED, particularly progress towards achieving expected outcomes. Therefore, should funding be renewed, it would be beneficial for each Working Group to develop detailed workplans for their respective recommended projects at the outset of each initiative, including identified deliverables, milestones and timelines where appropriate. The CED Secretariat, with their counterparts responsible for the coordination of CED activities at NRCan, should work to develop and implement mechanisms that will facilitate the ongoing collection of performance data by each working group. As well, the development of an overall CED-level workplan would be beneficial in facilitating and communicating these requirements to all those involved. The intention is to provide complete, timely, meaningful and accurate performance data that will fulfil departmental reporting requirements and inform decision-making yet does not result in excessive response burden for the working groups.
The ADMs of the International Affairs Branch and the Science & Technology Branch at Environment Canada, the ADMs of the Energy Sector, the Innovation & Energy Technology Sector and the Science & Policy Integration Sector at NRCan, and the ADM of Americas at DFAIT agree with the recommendation.
To track and report progress on the CED, the CED Secretariat developed a project tracking matrix and coordinated the preparation of information sheets on all of the CED projects. However, it is recognized that there is an ongoing need to collect updated and more in-depth information on the progress of the CED projects in order to better assess performance moving forward.
To improve project monitoring and assessment efforts, the working groups will develop detailed workplans which will include performance data for each CED project. The Secretariat will use these workplans to update the project tracking matrix and the program information sheets. As well, the CED Secretariat will, in cooperation with working groups, develop an annual workplan to cover key milestones for the CED. The workplan will also include senior-level meetings, stakeholder consultations, advocacy/outreach, reporting requirements, project implementation and program administration.
Winter 2011
- CED Secretariat workplan with timelines and targets (will be updated semi-annually)
Winter 2011
- Working groups to develop detailed workplans with timelines and targets for working group deliverables, information for the Secretariat to use in the project tracking matrix / project information sheets, and performance data