Departmental Sustainable Development Strategy

Overview of the Federal Government’s Approach to Sustainable Development

The Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (FSDS) 2013–16, tabled on November 4, 2013, guides the Government of Canada’s sustainable development activities, as required by the Federal Sustainable Development Act (FSDA). In keeping with the objectives of the FSDA, to make environmental decision making more transparent and accountable to Parliament, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) supports the implementation of the FSDS through the activities foreseen by this departmental strategy.

Accordingly, this Departmental Sustainable Development Strategy (DSDS) presents the results of the commitments for Theme I (Addressing Climate Change and Air Quality), Theme II (Maintaining Water Quality and Availability) and Theme III (Protecting Nature and Canadians) within the context of the 2013–16 FSDS. This DSDS also provides the results for Theme IV (Shrinking the Environmental Footprint – Beginning with Government) based on the 2010–13 FSDS. 

Themes I–III: Department/Agency–led Targets

Citizenship and Immigration Canada is not responsible for any targets under Themes I–III of the FSDS.

FSDS Goal FSDS Performance Indicator FSDS Target FSDS Performance Status
N/A N/A N/A N/A

Themes I–III: Implementation Strategies

Citizenship and Immigration Canada is not responsible for any implementation strategies under Themes I–III of the FSDS.

Theme IV: Implementation Strategies

  CIC is a participant in the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (FSDS) and contributes to the Greening Government Operations targets through the Internal Services Program. The Department contributes to the following target areas of Theme IV (Shrinking the Environmental Footprint – Beginning with Government) of the 2010–13 FSDS:

  • Greenhouse gas emissions from the federal fleet,
  • Electronic waste (electronic and electrical equipment),
  • Printer unit reduction,
  • Paper consumption,
  • Green meetings, and
  • Green procurement.

Green Building Targets

As of April 1, 2012, and pursuant to departmental strategic frameworks, new construction and build-to-lease projects and major renovation projects will achieve an industry-recognized level of high environmental performance.Footnote 1 (Target 8.1 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status N/A
Number of completed new construction, build-to-lease and major renovation projects in the given fiscal year, according to the departmental strategic framework. N/A
Number of completed new construction, build-to-lease and major renovation projects that have achieved an industry-recognized level of high environmental performance in the given fiscal year, according to the departmental strategic framework. N/A
Existence of a strategic framework. N/A

Strategies and/or Comments

N/A

As of April 1, 2012, and pursuant to departmental strategic frameworks, existing crown buildings over 1000 m2 will be assessed for environmental performance using an industry-recognized assessment tool.Footnote 2 (Target 8.2 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status N/A
Number of buildings over 1000 m2, according to the departmental strategic framework. N/A
Percentage of buildings over 1000 m2 in the given fiscal year that have been assessed using an industry-recognized assessment tool, according to the departmental strategic framework. N/A
Existence of a strategic framework. N/A

Strategies and/or Comments

N/A

As of April 1, 2012, and pursuant to departmental strategic frameworks, new lease or lease renewal projects over 1000 m2, where the Crown is the major lessee, will be assessed for environmental performance using an industry-recognized assessment tool.Footnote 3(Target 8.3 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status N/A
Number of completed lease and lease renewal projects over 1000 m2 in the given fiscal year, according to the departmental strategic framework. N/A
Number of completed lease and lease renewal projects over 1000 m2 that were assessed using an industry-recognized assessment tool in the given fiscal year, according to the departmental strategic framework. N/A
Existence of a strategic framework. N/A

Strategies and/or Comments

N/A

As of April 1, 2012, and pursuant to departmental strategic frameworks, fit–up and refit projects will achieve an industry-recognized level of high environmental performance.Footnote 4 (Target 8.4 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status N/A
Number of completed fit-up and refit projects in the given fiscal year, according to the departmental strategic framework. N/A
Number of completed fit-up and refit projects that have achieved an industry-recognized level of high environmental performance in the given fiscal year, according to the departmental strategic framework. N/A
Existence of a strategic framework. N/A

Strategies and/or Comments

N/A

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Target

The federal government will take action now to reduce levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from its operations to match the national target of 17% below 2005 by 2020. (Target 8.5 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Exceeded
Departmental GHG reduction target: Percentage of absolute reduction in GHG emissions by FY 2020–21, relative to FY 2005–06. 17%
Departmental GHG emissions in FY 200506, in kilotons of CO2 equivalent.  0.090 kilotons
Departmental GHG emissions in the given fiscal year, in kilotons of CO2 equivalent. 0.043 kilotons
Change in departmental GHG emissions from FY 2005–06 to the end of the given fiscal year, expressed as a percentage. 52.2% GHG reduction
Existence of an implementation plan to reduce GHG emissions. Fleet Policy approved and implemented in FY 2013-14.

Strategies and/or Comments

  1. Interim target: The Department’s cumulative annual interim target is a minimum 1.7% absolute reduction in GHG emissions annually, relative to the baseline fiscal year of 2005–06. By the end of the 2013–14 fiscal year (i.e., the third year of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy), the Department should have achieved a 6% reduction in GHG emissions (2% minimum per fiscal year). For FY 2013–14, CIC achieved 0.043 kilotons in GHG emissions for a 52.2% reduction, going from 0.090 kilotons to 0.043 kilotons.
    (0.090 kilotons – 0.043 kilotons) / 0.090 kilotons * 100 = 52.2% GHG reduction in FY 2013–14.
  2. Scope: Fleet. Fleet reports from CIC regions from which km and fuel consumption are used to calculate the GHG emissions.
  3. Roles and responsibilities: The Director General (DG) of Administration, Security and Accommodation is the target lead.
  4. Key activities: Replacement and/or disposal of old vehicles.
  5. Reporting requirements: Any project that has the potential to increase or decrease GHG emissions is reported to CIC’s Assistant Deputy Minister of Corporate Services after the project has been assessed using the Federal Greenhouse Gas Tracking Protocol—A Common Standard for Federal Operations.
  6. Plans for engagement: Further communication products to educate employees.
  7. Tools and resources: Federal Greenhouse Gas Tracking Protocol—A Common Standard for Federal Operations.

Surplus Electronic and Electrical Equipment Target

By March 31, 2014, each department will reuse or recycle all surplus electronic and electrical equipment (EEE) in an environmentally sound and secure manner. (Target 8.6 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Achieved
Existence of an implementation plan for the disposal of all departmentally generated EEE. Yes
Total number of departmental locations that have a fully implemented EEE implementation plan by the end of the given fiscal year, expressed as a percentage of all locations. 100%

Strategies and/or Comments

  1. Disposal of EEE is centralized at National Headquarters (NHQ) located in Ottawa.
  2. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, CIC is linked to the Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) EEE implementation plan (E-Waste) on its intranet, which includes all of the required elements, as per the mandatory implementation strategies listed in the Greening Government Operations (GGO) targets table.

Printing Unit Reduction Target

By March 31, 2013, each department will achieve an 8:1 average ratio of office employees to printing units. Departments will apply the target where building occupancy levels, security considerations, and space configuration allow. (Target 8.7 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status

Target status

Attention is required.

Ratio of departmental office employees to printing units in fiscal year 2010–11, where building occupancy levels, security considerations and space configuration allow. (Optional)

2.2:1

Ratio of departmental office employees to printing units at the end of the given fiscal year, where building occupancy levels, security considerations and space configuration allow.

2.2:1

Strategies and/or Comments

  1. Definition: Purchased and leased printing devices
    • Including: local printers, networked printers, multifunction devices, photocopiers and faxes;
    • Excluding: label printers, impact printers used only for business form printing, plotters, specialized inkjet ID card printers, specialized thermal wax transfer printers, laser card etchers, dedicated CD/DVD printers and desktop page scanners.
  2. Scope: All buildings, space configurations and employees are included in the effort to achieve an average ratio of 8:1. While some buildings may have a smaller ratio due to building occupancy or security considerations, on average, the Department will meet this target at the national level.
  3. Method used for determining number of printing units: An initial inventory of printing devices (as defined above) was completed nationally in October 2011 using a combination of methods, including a manual inventory, the use of the ZENworks Asset Management data and network discovery methods. For fax machine counts at NHQ, the number was estimated by counting the number of fax lines and subtracting the number of multifunction devices that also have fax capabilities. The addition and disposal of equipment since October 2011 are tracked by the Solution and Information Management Branch (SIMB).
  4. Method used for determining the number of office employees: For the initial report, unique users were calculated using ZENworks. However, for subsequent reports we recommend refining the query and using Active Directory to obtain more accurate information.
  5. Reporting requirements: Staff from SIMB will be coordinated through ASA.
  6. Roles and responsibilities: The business lead will be represented by the DG of Administration, Security and Accommodation.
  7. Plans for engagement: A voluntary return of printing devices by staff, a printing services directive, as well as a request for proposals to obtain a service provider, which will be issued and should be awarded in fiscal year 2015–16. The request for proposals to obtain a service provider is related to the national contract to centralize photocopiers and MFDs across Canada. Please note that this target has not been achieved due to lack of resources, complexity of activities and number of stakeholders involved.

Paper Consumption Target

By March 31, 2014, each department will reduce internal paper consumption per office employee by 20%. Each department will establish a baseline between 2005–06 and 2011–12 and an applicable scope. (Target 8.8 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Opportunity for Improvement
Number of sheets of internal office paper purchased or consumed per office employee in the selected baseline year, according to the departmental scope. Baseline:
5,966 sheets/employee in FY 2010–11
Cumulative reduction (or increase) in paper consumption per office employee in the given fiscal year, expressed as a percentage, relative to the selected baseline year. Objective: 20% reduction in FY 2013–14
Results: 9.4% (5,430 sheets/employee)

Strategies and/or Comments

  1. Numbers: If we go through the initial GGO template submitted in June 2013, the report shows the chronology from the baseline FY 2010–11 to FY 2013–14 with the objectives of 10%, 15% and 20% for FY 2011–12, FY 2012–13 and FY 2013–14.

    FSDS 2010–13 requires each department to establish a baseline between 2005–06 and 2011–12 as well as objectives. In the past, the previous manager established the baseline for FY 2010–11 at 3,156 sheets per employee. This was determined when FSDS 2010–13 was approved during FY 2010–11 and the calculation was not based on the entire 2010–11 FY, but rather on mid-year 2010–11 results (number of sheets and employees). In fact, 3,156 sheets per employee represents the paper consumption at the end of Q2 in FY 2010–11. Following that calculation, the manager calculated the different objectives for each of the following FYs based on 3,156 sheets per employee: 10% reduction for FY 2011–12 (2,840 sheets per employee: 3,156 - 316 = 2,840); 15% reduction for FY 2012–13 (2,683 sheets per employee: 3,156 - 473 = 2,683); 20% reduction for FY 2013–14 (2,525 sheets per employee: 3,156 - 631 = 2,525). These numbers are incorrect as they were based on mid-year data for FY 2010–11. Only the objective reduction percentages (10%, 15% and 20%) are still valid.

    Once the official numbers for the entire 2010–11 FY were available, the FY 2010–11 baseline was readjusted. The new baseline for FY 2010–11 was then established at 5,996 sheets per employee (almost double for the entire year).  

    For FY 2011–12, CIC paper consumption was 4,780 sheets per employee, a 20.3% reduction compared to the FY 2010–11 baseline ((5,996 - 4,780)/5,996 = 20.3%), 10.3 percentage points more than the established 10% objective.

    For FY 2012–13, CIC paper consumption was 4,011 sheets per employee (21,392,500 sheets for 5,333 employees). This represents a 33.1% reduction compared to the FY 2010–11 baseline ((5,996 - 4,011)/5,996 = 33.1%)—18.1 percentage points more than the established 15% objective.

    For FY 2013–14, CIC paper consumption was 5,430 sheets per employee (32,394,500 sheets for 5,966 employees), a 9.4% reduction compared to the FY 2010–11 baseline ((5,996 - 5,430)/5,996 = 9.4%), 10.6 percentage points less than the 20% objective established for FY 2013–14. That difference is explained by the fact that the number of sheets purchased in FY 2013–14 (32,394,500 sheets) was significantly higher than the number purchased in FY 2012–2013 (21,392,500 sheets). The number of employees on March 31, 2014 (5,966 employees) was also significantly higher, up 633 employees compared to March 31, 2013 (5,333 employees). These two factors had an impact on the reduction of paper consumption last year.

  2. Scope: CIC elected to include all departmental employees. The number of employees at the end of 2010–11 was 5,552; at the end of 2011–12, 5,298; at the end of 2012–13, 5,333 and at the end of 2013–14, 5,966.

    Human Resources provided the numbers mentioned in Section i for each fiscal year end and they confirmed that their numbers come from their official dashboards approved by the Management Accountability Committee, the Sector Management Committee and the Executive Committee every quarter.

  3. Method used for determining paper consumption: PWGSC standing offer usage data and paper consumption reports from PWGSC.
  4. Method used for determining number of office employees: Official dashboards from HR approved by the Management Accountability Committee, the Sector Management Committee and the Executive Committee.
  5. Reporting requirements: The DG of Administration, Security and Accommodation uses information from PWGSC standing offers annually.
  6. Roles and responsibilities: The DG of Administration, Security and Accommodation is the target lead.
  7. Plans for engagement: Procurement personnel and acquisition cardholders are now required to purchase paper only through PWGSC standing offers. This has been disseminated via central communication and is documented in the procedures manuals available on the CIC intranet Web site.
  8. Further communication products to inform and educate staff.

Green Meetings Target

By March 31, 2012, each department will adopt a guide for greening meetings. (Target 8.9 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Achieved
Presence of a green meetings guide. Yes

Strategies and/or Comments

  1. Scope of the green meeting guide: All departmental or interdepartmental meetings held at CIC offices with at least 10 participants.
  2. Reporting requirement: CIC’s Administration, Security and Accommodation Branch implemented the green meeting guide and monitors its use. The objective is to promote the green meeting guide among key groups such as administrative staff, etc. CIC published information on its intranet and has also informed all employees.
  3. The green meeting guide was adopted on November 27, 2012.
  4. Roles and responsibilities: The DG of Administration, Security and Accommodation Branch is the target lead.
  5. Key components: Planning, travel/accommodations, procurement/hospitality and tracking/accountability.
  6. Mechanisms to evaluate: There is currently no formal mechanism to evaluate the green meeting guide.
  7. Plans for engagement: Departmental policy mandating use, email dissemination, topic for management meetings, green meeting training seminar.
  8.  Further communication product to inform and educate staff.

Green Procurement Targets

Green Procurement Reporting for Departments and Agencies bound by the Policy on Green Procurement (PGP) but not the Federal Sustainable Development Act (FSDA).

In compliance with Section 7 of the PGP, it is mandatory for all departments and agencies bound by the policy to (plan and) report on their green procurement initiatives even if they are not bound by the FSDA.

Such departments and agencies may follow the approach required of FSDA departments for green procurement as specified in sections 8.10 and 8.11 below. Should they choose to take this approach, they are advised to review sections 8.10 and 8.11 of the Guidelines for Reporting in the Greening Government Operations Supplementary Table for detailed instructions.

Alternatively, they may report on their plan (and progress) regarding green procurement using the following table. Should they choose this approach, they are advised to review the Guideline on Green Procurement Implementation, Target Setting and Reporting for Small and Micro Federal Departments and Agencies.

Strategies and/or Comments

N/A

As of April 1, 2011, each department will establish at least three SMART green procurement targets to reduce environmental impacts. (Target 8.10 from 2010–13 FSDS)

1. Utilize green consolidated procurement instruments for 95% of IT hardware purchases.

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Opportunity for Improvement
Performance measure:
Dollar value of contracts for IT Hardware.
Baseline not available. Actual result for FY 2013–14 is 95.0%.

Strategies and/or Comments

Green consolidated procurement instruments for IT hardware purchases are used and the purchases are covered throughout standing offers by default. Procurement and Contracting Section (PCS) must use procurement instruments in their procurement activities and confirm that at least 95% of IT hardware purchases were done with procurement instruments.

  1. Specific: Refers to specific type of commodity and purchasing mechanism.
  2. Measurable: Information available from CIC’s financial system.
  3. Achievable: Departmental policy mandating the use of PWGSC standing offers.
  4. Relevant: High volume of IT hardware purchases.
  5. Time-bound: Date established for target implementation and completion.
  6. Use of standing offers, supply arrangements and other competitive methods such as MERX, etc.

Other Reporting Considerations:

  1. Scope: All IT hardware purchases.
  2. Processes/reporting requirements: Financial database.
  3. Roles and responsibilities: The Manager of IT Procurement is the target lead.
  4. Opportunities for continuous improvement: For select IT hardware not available from PWGSC, the Department will work to ensure that IT hardware purchases incorporate environmental considerations.
  5. Plans for engagement: Email dissemination and meetings with Directors General.

2. Utilize green consolidated procurement instruments for 80% of IT Professional Services purchases.

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Exceeded
Performance measure:
Dollar value of contracts for IT Professional Services
Baseline not available and result is 99.0%.

Strategies and/or Comments

Green consolidated procurement instruments for IT Professional Services purchases are used and the purchases are covered through standing offers by default. PCS must use procurement instruments in their procurement activities and confirm that no less than 80% of IT Professional Services purchases were done with procurement instruments.

  1. Specific: Refers to a specific type of commodity and purchasing mechanism.
  2. Measurable: Information available from CIC’s financial system.
  3. Achievable: Departmental policy mandating the use of PWGSC standing offers.
  4. Relevant: High volume of professional services contracts.
  5. Time-bound: Date established for target implementation and completion.

Other Reporting Considerations:

  1. Scope: All IT professional services.
  2. Processes/reporting requirements: Financial database.
  3. Roles and responsibilities: The Manager of IT Procurement is the target lead.
  4. Opportunities for continuous improvement: For select IT professional services not available from PWGSC, the Department will work to ensure that purchases incorporate environmental considerations.
  5. Plans for engagement: Email dissemination and meetings with Directors General.

3. Use of standardized processes including the encouragement of consolidation of requirements.

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Achieved
Performance measure:
Not available
Baseline not available.

Progress against performance measure in the given fiscal year: Yes.

Strategies and/or Comments

PCS must use and include standardized processes in their procurement activities. PCS encouraged consolidation with all clients. Therefore, standardized processes encouraging the consolidation of requirements are used but PCS cannot quantify it. Even if PCS uses the procedures manual, it is difficult to quantify this target.

  1. Working with technical authorities to encourage planning through regular communication and reporting.
  2. Procurement and Contracting Services has procedural manuals; where applicable, the manuals encourage the consolidation of requirements. For example, they state that CIC must ensure that standing offers or supply arrangements are used. PCS do not have control over what Responsibility Centre Managers do within their scope of authority. There is no monitoring capacity in procurement at this time.

As of April 1, 2011, each department will establish SMART targets for training, employee performance evaluations and management processes and controls, as they pertain to procurement decision making. (Target 8.11 from 2010–13 FSDS)

Training for select employees

As of April 1, 2011, 95% of materiel managers and procurement personnel (including all Purchasing Group (PG)-classified employees, as well as employees and managers identified as procurement and/or materiel management functional specialists) will receive green procurement training through the Canada School of Public Service (CSPS) Green Procurement course (C215) or in-house equivalent.

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Exceeded
Performance measure:
Number of procurement employees trained
100%

Strategies and/or Comments

  1. Scope: All procurement specialists at NHQ and in the regions have completed the CSPS C215 course. Administrative assistants have access to in-house equivalent training.
  2. Reporting requirements: Collect data from the CSPS annually; HR maintains an up-to-date list of employees with/needing training.
  3. Roles and responsibilities: The DG of Administration, Security and Accommodation is the target lead.
  4. Opportunities for continuous improvement: Targeting 100% of employees is difficult due to turnover.
  5. Plans for engagement: Email dissemination of policy.

Employee performance evaluations for managers ad functional heads of procurement and materiel management.

As of April 1, 2012, environmental considerations will be incorporated into the performance evaluations of all functional heads of procurement and materiel management.

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Achieved
Performance measure:
% of procurement specialists (PG employees and other identified employees of PCS Branch) with environmental considerations in their performance evaluation
100%

Strategies and/or Comments

  1. Specific: One hundred percent (100%) of procurement specialists have the environmental considerations incorporated in their employee performance evaluations.
  2. Achievement level: One hundred percent (100%) for all NHQ and regional procurement and materiel management specialists.
  3. Measurable: Information available from the in-house Human Resources Branch tracking system.
  4. Achievable: Departmental policy mandates that performance evaluations for all existing and new functional heads of procurement and materiel management include environmental considerations.
  5. Relevant: Targets all relevant employees. Relevant employees are PG employees who must have the environmental considerations in their performance evaluation, in this case 100% of the PG.
  6. Time-bound: Date established for target implementation and completion. The date would be end of each fiscal year when PG employees must prepare their performance evaluation and learning plan. The PGs who will have the environmental consideration included in their performance evaluation are determined by DGs and Directors. Beginning in spring 2014 with the new FSDS 2013–16, DGs and Directors will have this target included in their PMA.

Other Reporting Considerations:

  1. Methodology: DGs and Directors of PG-classified employees and employees identified as procurement functional specialists. The Methodology section is drawn from the Guidelines for Reporting in the GGO Supplementary Table in the Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) and Departmental Performance Report (DPR). The methodology includes the decision-making of the DGs and Directors as to which PG and procurement specialists need to have the environmental considerations in their performance evaluations. With the new FSDS 2013–16 coming in spring 2014, we plan to involve high-level senior management in procurement and material management and to include environmental considerations in their performance evaluations. Their performance evaluations have already been adjusted to reflect this new request.
  2. Reporting requirements: Managers are to report to target lead.
  3. Roles and responsibilities: The Director of Administration is the target lead.
  4. Plans for engagement: Inclusion in employee performance management agreement.

Management processes and controls.

As of April 1, 2013, management processes and controls relating to procurement will have incorporated environmental considerations.

Performance Measure Performance Status
Target status Achieved
Performance measure:
Not available
Baseline not available. Progress against performance measured
in the given fiscal year: Yes.

Strategies and/or Comments

  1. PCS has procedural manuals that encourage incorporating environmental considerations into management processes and controls relating to procurement. For example, CIC must ensure that standing offers and supply arrangements are used. Using standing offers and supply arrangements will reduce the environmental footprint by reducing paper consumption in procurement activities. As well, PWGSC identifies standing offers and supply arrangements as green instruments. PCS cannot control what Responsibility Centre Managers do within the scope of their authority.
  2. PCS has incorporated environmental considerations in its management processes and controls relating to procurement through the policy suite renewal, the consolidation of requirements, a reduction in the printing volume, the higher number of email transactions, and the use of GCDOCS, the Government of Canada’s new enterprise-wide content management solution. Using GCDOCS for the consultation and saving of documents reduces paper consumption, thereby reducing the environmental footprint. PCS has also improved its capacities to use information from electronic documents.

Reporting on the Purchase of Offset Credits

Mandatory reporting on the purchase of greenhouse gas emissions offset credits, according to the Policy Framework for Offsetting Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Major International Events.

Performance Measure Performance Status
Quantity of emissions offset in the given fiscal year. N/A

Strategies and/or Comments

N/A

Voluntary Reporting on Any Other Greening Government Operations Initiative

Performance Measure Performance Status
N/A N/A

Strategies and/or Comments

N/A

Additional Sustainable Development Activities and Initiatives for CIC

As part of the Strategic Environmental Assessment process under the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, CIC developed a new risk-based preliminary scan tool to better screen the Department’s Memoranda to Cabinet and Treasury Board Submissions for potential environmental effects. Implementation of the preliminary scan tool began in Q4 and is currently ongoing.

Sustainable Development Management System

CIC examined social, economic and environmental impacts and principles of equity for Memoranda to Cabinet and Treasury Board submissions where it was relevant and necessary. The objective of this broader view of sustainability is to arrive at integrated decision making that maximizes the potential for our policies and programs. This additional analysis is integral to the CIC Sustainable Development Policy Framework, which brings together the principles of sustainable development as stated in the Federal Sustainable Development Act. This Framework effectively links the goals and targets of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy (FSDS) to the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals.

Strategic Environmental Assessment

During the 2013–14 reporting cycle, CIC considered the environmental effects of initiatives subject to the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals as part of its decision making processes. Through the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) process, departmental/agency proposals were found to have no environmental effects on the 2013–16 FSDS goals and targets in any theme.

For further information on CIC’s activities to support sustainable development and strategic environmental assessments, please visit the departmental Sustainable Development web page. For complete information on the FSDS, please visit the Environment Canada Web site.

Report a problem or mistake on this page
Please select all that apply:

Thank you for your help!

You will not receive a reply. For enquiries, contact us.

Date modified: