Fiduciary Responsibility and the Green Energy Act, 2009 (Ontario, Canada).
| Autor: | Tsuji SRJ; Stephen R.J. Tsuji is a master's candidate at School of Environment, Resources, and Sustainability, University of Waterloo in Waterloo, Canada. |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | Environmental justice (Print) [Environ Justice] 2021 Feb 01; Vol. 14 (1), pp. 76-85. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Feb 18. |
| DOI: | 10.1089/env.2020.0017 |
| Abstrakt: | Analyses of the Green Energy Act (2009) have stated that the act had numerous shortcomings concerning the environmental impacts of the energy projects initiated within its purview. This account addresses the core points of divergence in the policy's creation that are responsible for the problematic effects. The crux of these problems comes from the ambiguity of the concept of green energy within the act due to its lack of a formal definition. The reasons for this anomaly originate from the Legislative Assembly of Ontario's address on the topic and their decision to let it remain ambiguous. This stance raises questions of whether they are fulfilling their fiduciary duties to an acceptable level. Although these questions of duty and obligation are both delicate and necessary when talking about projects that involve Canada's indigenous peoples, it is not limited to them due to the scope of the effects. Ultimately, although the policy was repealed in January 2019, there are many lessons that can be learned from the missteps of the Act. Competing Interests: No competing financial interests exist. (© Stephen R.J. Tsuji 2021; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.) |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|