A Better Approach to Resource Development
Almost a decade ago, the New Brunswick Commission on Hydraulic Fracturing made history by becoming the first in North America to successfully bridge divides; their work offers a model to follow today
It’s been a decade since Cheryl Robertson, John D. McLaughlin and Marc Léger came together to lead the New Brunswick Commission on Hydraulic Fracturing.
You’ll be forgiven if you don’t remember the substance of what they did or said; the government of the day quietly accepted their three-volume report and just as quietly shelved it.
A pity as it was the first and possibly only North American report on hydraulic fracturing, or fracking as it’s more commonly known, that received the public acceptance of environmental, Indigenous and industry groups.
I’ve still got the newspaper clippings to prove it, because I was there, hired to plan and manage the Commissioners’ extensive stakeholder engagement process and to act as their scribe and editor for all their publications, including that final three-volume report.
The Commissioners were successful in bridging what was perceived to be insurmountable divides because they recognized that the underlying challenges were not specific to shale gas.
Now, as New Brunswick and the rest of Canada get ready to zoom ahead with resource development, I thought it would be a good time to revisit some of Cheryl, John and Marc’s thoughts and recommendations.
I’m going to break it down over a few columns, with each column tackling a different underlying issue identified by the Commissioners.
Let’s start with the core problem: trust.
Cheryl, John and Marc began their work in an environment of suspicion, anger and political posturing.
The issue of shale gas development in New Brunswick was clearly divided between two sides: those who wanted it and those who did not.
These two sides had defined not only the tone of the debate but also its structure, which adhered to a traditional communications model: stay on message, appeal to emotions, project self-assurance, counterattack when questioned and talk to win.
The Commissioners knew that in order to be successful, they would need to break through the rhetoric and build a solution that recognized the validity of each side’s arguments.
To address that, the Commissioners made three key decisions prior to starting their work.
Side Walks is fully funded by readers and organizations that support our mission to produce local journalism. If you’re enjoying this story, please consider becoming a paid subscriber, $8/month or $80/year. You can also sign up for a free subscription. All subscriptions deliver Side Walks directly to your email inbox, and you can also read along on the Substack app.
Think of us as your friendly neighbourhood buskers setting fire to complacency while juggling a mix of coverage, commentary and culture – and this is the point in the show where we pass the hat. We appreciate your support!
Now back to the story…
First, they redefined the players in the debate.
Rather than categorize stakeholders by their job titles or affiliations, I encouraged the Commissioners to consider the willingness of groups of individuals to work on finding a common solution, which would, as it always does, require trade-offs.
Second, the Commissioners redefined the issue at the heart of the shale gas debate.
The original question, ‘Should New Brunswick permit hydraulic fracturing?’ was problematic because it enhanced divisions rather than bridging them by asking for a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer.
The Commissioners reframed the core question by asking what problem was of greatest concern to New Brunswick residents, regardless of their position on shale gas. The answer, as New Brunswickers wondered and still do, is whether they can afford to build the life they want for themselves and their families in New Brunswick.
The core question then becomes, ‘How will we create and retain individual and community wealth in New Brunswick?’
Part of that answer lies in having access to affordable, reliable, and increasingly clean energy, which, to date, has included natural gas, almost all of which is produced in other jurisdictions, such as Pennsylvania and Saskatchewan, via hydraulic fracturing.
This led the Commissioners to refine the question they sought to answer: Do we want to use locally sourced natural gas to serve New Brunswick’s current and future energy mix, or continue to buy hydraulically fractured natural gas from other jurisdictions?
Phrasing the question in this way put the needs of New Brunswick residents front and centre.
Third, Cheryl, John and Mark were open, transparent, and publicly reported on their work throughout the process.
The trio began their work amidst heightened distrust and cynicism from all sides. They knew that everything they said, did or wrote would be seen and interpreted by the public, politicians, industry officials, and researchers. This required significant discipline, and they pledged to each other that they would approach all interactions with curiosity and humility. They also wrote blog posts, updating readers on what they were learning and thinking about throughout the process. This helped to put people at ease, and over time, a significant number of people from all sides of the debate came to trust the Commissioners.
What follows is what they wrote about trust in Volume 1 of their February 2016 report. I have made one edit to the statement. In some places, I have replaced ‘shale gas’ with ‘resource development’ to bring the conversation into the present day.
I think you will see that what Cheryl, John, and Mark wrote nine years ago remains relevant for what lies ahead here in New Brunswick and elsewhere in Canada.
An Excerpt From The Commission on Hydraulic Fracturing – Volume 1: The Findings
New Brunswick is in the midst of massive technological, economic and social change.
We, its residents, have a choice to make: we can either passively wait for these waves of change to crash over us, or we can grab the wheel and navigate our way across together.
The Commission encourages our fellow New Brunswickers to choose the latter.
However, in doing so, we acknowledge that all of us – residents, Indigenous people, businesses and governments – have to actively participate in negotiating our way forward, and that will not be easy.
Addressing the issues of energy and resource development will require deep systems change and the Government of New Brunswick cannot and should not do this alone.
We got to this point in the conversation because of a breakdown in the relationship among communities, Indigenous people, industry and governments; mending that relationship is how we will move forward.
Condition: A social license in place.
Throughout this process, nothing has provoked greater debate than the concept of social license. What is it? How do you get it? And once obtained, how do you hold onto it?
In our conversations with both fellow New Brunswickers and outside experts on all sides of the debate, the Commission used a simple working definition for social license: informed public consent. This working definition has three parts.
Informed, which reflects the need for an open and transparent process that provides everyone with access to timely scientific and technical information, delivered by trusted and objective sources, and that also has the ability to bring all parties together for a meaningful shared dialogue about the possible risks and benefits of a project.
Public, which reinforces the central role of citizens in this process and the responsibility we each bear to participate – and the responsibility of Government to create an environment that enables that participation.
Consent, which reflects the need to build community acceptance and respect for the public regulatory process. This is needed to ensure members of the public believe their views are respected and reflected in decisions, and that all stakeholders accept the role of the regulator as arbiter on issues related to energy and resource development. While all New Brunswickers may not agree with all decisions – unanimity is unlikely on complex issues – the provincial government can work to build public respect for the process. Without that mutual respect, the provincial government’s process runs the risk of being rejected by the very public it seeks to serve.
While that definition was a useful starting point, it is time to move on to a new concept that better reflects the model of ongoing consultation and information exchange among residents, Indigenous people, public institutions and the private sector outlined below.
Finding #1: A different approach is needed to address complex public issues
It is unfair to ask any one industry to bear the weight of trying to solve the complex economic and social challenges New Brunswick faces.
Yet that is precisely what we do with new development projects in New Brunswick.
A number of concerns raised about shale gas development, such as the industry’s impact on water, air, human health, wildlife, vegetation, roads, traffic, and Indigenous rights and cultural practices are also concerns people have with existing industries and human activities in New Brunswick.
That isn’t solely the problem of one industry or project; that’s our problem – and it’s why the province needs a robust and independent regulatory system. It should be born of strong public policy that will clearly define the rules and conditions for operating resource-based businesses and projects in New Brunswick and which respect our community goals and values.
New Brunswickers must rebuild trust in our public institutions, in our corporate sector and in each other.
For some, this will not be easy.
Those who adamantly oppose resource development and those who are equally adamant in their support of it do not trust each other.
That is why it is vitally important for that third group of New Brunswick citizens the Commission has identified – those who acknowledge there are risks and benefits inherent in any form of development – to take a leadership role in the next phase of this conversation.
We met a number of people from this third group in the course of our work who share a common trait: they are deeply connected to the formal and informal networks that enrich life in our communities.
This is important because the future of resource development in New Brunswick lies in achieving the ongoing support and consent of the people most directly impacted.
The Government has the responsibility to create the space for that community-focused conversation to occur, and it currently has a small window of opportunity to do this.
There remains great uncertainty as to the size and commercial viability of some of New Brunswick’s resources. Knowing that, the Government has time to design, resource and implement a regulatory system, including a robust research and monitoring process, and industry has time to engage in a substantive way with local communities.
Finding #2: A broader community conversation about community risks and benefits is required.
Conversations regarding energy and resource development must be community-focused because it is the communities located closest to proposed and existing developments that accept the most direct risk if Government decides to proceed.
At its core is a recognition that the Government’s relationship with residents is built on trust and mutual respect.
Within this relationship, the first obligation is New Brunswick’s Indigenous people because they are rights holders, and the Government has a duty to consult with them ahead of any development.
The next obligation should be the people and communities directly impacted by the proposed development because they are being asked to assume the greatest risks and therefore proposed benefits should reflect their role as community hosts.
Finally, the Government must assess the impacts, both direct and indirect, on the wider provincial population and assign commiserate benefits.
Up Next on Side Walks: Building a Provincial Strategy for Resource Development and Risk Management
The Commissioners’ recommendations for creating an integrated risk management model for resource development, and a larger strategy for driving wealth creation in New Brunswick.
If you enjoyed this column, please share the love with others who you think would enjoy the conversation we’re having on Side Walks. We’re a Canadian media start-up building a community of fellow Canucks (and the people who love us) interested in finding common ground around complex issues by focusing on local repercussions and opportunities caused by national and global issues. We’re based in New Brunswick, on Canada’s East Coast. Cheers
Stroll Over to Side Walks For More Stories
New Brunswick Leads the Way on Groundwater Protection: As communities raise alarms over local threats, the province has a chance to double down on its leadership in water protection — and turn public concern into a model of environmental sovereignty.
New TV series Revival comes alive in New Brunswick's deep, dark woods: The rural noir supernatural mystery pays homage to its graphic novel roots with a mix of humour, heart and horror that plays out on the back roads of Kings County.
Built For Speed: A 24/7 workforce, a floating warehouse, and 3 million metric tonnes of French fries and other food products are next on the agenda for a resurgent Port Saint John
We Are River People: The East Coast may be known for its coastline, but here in New Brunswick, our mighty river systems play an equal part in defining and shaping our lives and culture.
The Crown Goes to Town: During today's Throne Speech, spare a thought for how peace and security can occur in places where natural resources are plentiful and peaceful co-existence is in short supply.
Tiptoeing Through The Rezoning: Saint John's piecemeal approach to industrial development is a weird way to build a provincial economy
Side Walks Home Page
Catch up on all our stories.