Despite the federal government’s claim that its national climate‑adaptation strategy is delivering early wins, an independent analysis says the programme has not curbed the very hazards it was meant to address.
Government’s narrative
The strategy, finalised in 2023, set out a roadmap for preparing Canadian communities for extreme weather and a warming climate. Ottawa estimates that every dollar spent on proactive adaptation can save taxpayers between $13 and $15 in the long term. In its latest progress report the government says it has met nine of the strategy’s short‑term targets, including that 92 per cent of Canadians are now aware of the risks to their households and that 30 per cent have taken steps to respond to those risks.
The report also lists 73 actions taken across 22 departments and agencies, $2.1 billion spent since the strategy’s launch, and a $34 million package for 141 climate‑resilience projects in 128 communities – ranging from cooling stations in Halifax parks to heat‑pump retrofits in public housing and flood‑reduction work on the Kanesatake Lands in Quebec.
Independent assessment
Ryan Ness, director of adaptation at the Canadian Climate Institute, says the progress report “paints an overly optimistic picture of success.” He adds that while “the federal government’s been doing quite a number of things. Lots of programs and initiatives and projects,” there is “little evidence that any of it is actually reducing the most important risk that Canada is facing right now.”
Ness points to three core threats – expanding wildfires, large‑scale flooding and extreme heat waves – that have intensified since the strategy was released. Canada suffered its two worst wildfire seasons on record after 2023. The Canadian National Fire Database recorded more than 170,000 sq km burned in 2023 – an area larger than twice New Brunswick – and about 83,000 sq km in 2025, an area larger than Lake Superior. So far this year, wildfires have scorched over four million hectares, an area comparable to Nova Scotia, setting the season up to be the fourth‑worst on record.
Flood risk remains stark. Government data suggest 1.5 million homes are exposed to flood hazards severe enough to become uninsurable. Although the progress report notes “hundreds of new flood‑mapping projects” underway, it also admits that 94 per cent of people in high‑risk zones still do not know their homes are vulnerable.
Earlier criticism
A 2024 report by Canada’s environment commissioner, Jerry DeMarco, concluded that Ottawa’s adaptation efforts “stumbled out of the gate.” DeMarco argued the strategy was poorly designed, failed to prioritise the nation’s climate risks and relied on existing departmental priorities rather than a coordinated plan. He highlighted the short‑term health costs of wildfire smoke – estimated between $410 million and $1.8 billion annually from 2013 to 2018 – and a surge in Lyme disease cases from 144 in 2009 to 2,525 in 2022, a rise of more than 1,500 per cent.
Political promises and reality
The progress report touts the “Two Billion Trees” campaign, a flagship promise of the Liberal government under former prime minister Justin Trudeau in 2021. The government’s website claims almost one billion trees had been planted by 2025, yet Prime Minister Mark Carney shelved the programme in a budget‑cutting exercise last year.
Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin was unavailable for comment. In a statement, her press secretary Chris Zhou said Ottawa has spent $2.1 billion on the strategy over four years and that “Budget 2025 introduced new community infrastructure and youth‑focused initiatives that will further advance climate adaptation and resilience objectives across the country.” Zhou also asserted that all new federal infrastructure funding now incorporates climate resilience and that nine of the national‑adaptation targets have been met or exceeded.
Data gaps and next steps
Ness argues that the government is not tracking the right metrics to gauge real outcomes. “They’re not collecting the data that they need to show whether or not big outcomes that are making Canada safer and more resilient are actually happening,” he says.
The gap between Ottawa’s reported achievements and the on‑the‑ground escalation of climate‑related disasters raises questions about the effectiveness of Canada’s adaptation agenda and the need for clearer priorities, robust measurement and tangible results.