Renegotiation of the 1987 Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement: From Confusion to Promise

Abstract

For nearly four decades, the Great Lakes regime has invoked the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement as the mechanism for binational cooperation on programs and policies. Many advances in water quality have led to unquestionable improvements in ecosystem quality, habitat and biodiversity, and water infrastructure. Still, Great Lakes scientists have issued compelling evidence that the ecological health of the basin ecosystem is at significant risk. In 2012, the Agreement will be revised for the first time in 25 years. The degree of engagement in a future Agreement, including scope, issues of significant importance, governance and collaboration will hinge on a thorough analytical process, so far seemingly absent, coupled with real consultation, so far marginally evident. Renegotiating the Agreement to generate a revitalized and sustainable future mandates that science inform contemporary public policy, and that inclusive discourse and public engagement be integral through the process. Many of these steps are still absent, and the analysis presented here strongly suggests that the constituents of the Great Lakes regime voice their views critically, emphatically, and often. If the negotiators listen, we can collectively make the Lakes Great.

Ballast water management in Canada: A historical perspective and implications for the future

“…In 1972, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) was ratified by Canada and the USA, committing both countries to restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes [41]. The GLWQA requires that both governments have compatible regulations regarding BWM in the GLR [61,83].…”

Monitoring, Managing, and Communicating Risk of Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) in Recreational Resources across Canada

“…34 , 42 , 88 This is concerning given published reports on how changing agricultural, environmental, tourism, and climatic parameters have been contributing to increased blooms risks in regions previously not affected by cyanobacteria. 93 , 94 …”

“…34,42,88 This is concerning given published reports on how changing agricultural, environmental, tourism, and climatic parameters have been contributing to increased blooms risks in regions previously not affected by cyanobacteria. 93,94 When comparing the different levels of monitoring of HABs across provinces, only 3 provinces (Alberta, Manitoba, and Quebec) conduct regular proactive monitoring. 67,73,85,89 Monitoring is triggered by reporting in Ontario, 82 whereas other provinces perform case-by-case sampling to determine if a bloom is a health threat.…”

Thriving and prosperous: How we rallied to confront collective challenges

“…The Great Lakes region has vast natural resources, but there are natural limits that must be respected. These natural resources should be used in a sustainable manner, as overuse may trigger a tipping point from which Great Lakes basin ecosystems cannot recover (Bails et al, 2005;Krantzberg, 2012). Authors have noted that reduced economic growth or even degrowth does not necessarily mean reduced well-being, provided basic needs are met (as summarized by Schneider et al, 2010).…”