Spring 2025// Canadian Government Executive / 23 FEATURE policies. Austerity and rising inequality fueled a rise in populist nationalism. Technooptimism was replaced by fears about the corrosion of civic discourse. The COVID pandemic put new strains on the relationship between governments and citizens. Canadian politicians, like their colleagues in other countries, improvised furiously as one crisis followed another. For several reasons, the remaining decades of this century will be just as challenging for Canadian governments. The effects of the climate emergency will be intense and complex. Geopolitical tensions are likely to persist, and the internal stability of the four big powers (the United States, China, the European Union, and India) seems likely to decay, as each grapples with the effects of climate change and other internal pressures. Technological advances will cause more disruption to the Canadian economy and society. At the same time, the country will continue to grapple with familiar problems such as slow productivity growth, population aging, and immigration. There are signs that regional and secessionist pressures inside Canada may intensify as well. Any one of these problems would be daunting by itself. The difficulty for Canadian governments is that they will need to be managed simultaneously. Worse still, these problems may feed on one another, potentially overwhelming the capacity of decision-makers to respond in a timely and effective way. The collapse of political systems is often caused by such a cascade of events, which is sometimes called a polycrisis. State failure happens more often than we recognize, and there is no guarantee that Canada will escape this fate in coming decades. The way to avoid state failure (and, more positively, to promote economic and social development within a durable state) is by enhancing the adaptability of the Canadian government system. Adaptability refers to the capacity of a system to anticipate and respond constructively to major challenges. An adaptable system performs four functions well. The first is anticipation: the system must be good at taking a long view to identify potential dangers. The second is invention: the system must be good at devising grand strategies that seem likely to be effective in managing the complete set of anticipated dangers. The third is legitimation: the system must be good at building political support for one strategy or another, among leaders and citizens. And the fourth is execution: The system must be good at translating strategy into action, by renovating institutions, drafting laws, and executing programs. Unfortunately, there is evidence that the adaptability of the Canadian governmental system has declined over the last forty years. In part, the country is the victim of its success: Canada has become a larger and more vibrant polity in which collective decisionmaking and coordination are more difficult. Adaptability has also suffered because of exogenous shocks, like the destruction of traditional media by innovations in information technology. Adaptability has been compromised by governmental blunders as well. Leaders have abandoned institutions that once promoted adaptability, or failed to respond appropriately as societal and technological shifts undermined that quality. Loss of adaptability can be fatal for any country. However, steps can be taken to improve adaptability in Canada. Four reforms are set out below that would improve the capacity of the governmental system to respond constructively to the challenges of the twenty-first century. A Bigger and More Complex System In terms of formal regime design, Canada may be one of the most decentralized countries in the world. Power is diffused in several ways. Canada was set up as a federal system, with sovereignty divided among federal and provincial governments. It is also a liberal system because individuals have a sphere of autonomy that must be respected by governments. It is a democracy as well, which means that power is shifted from elites to voters. And the Canadian economy is premised on market capitalism, which means that businesses have a significant degree of autonomy too. There are good reasons for organizing Canadian society in this way. This system seems more likely to maximize individual freedom, creativity, and economic growth. However, this sort of system may struggle to perform the four functions essential to adaptability. For example, democratically elected leaders may have an incentive to focus on short-term election pressures rather than long-term challenges. Federal and provincial leaders may disagree about national priorities and even face incentives to fight rather than cooperate. Building consensus about national strategy, either in the elite or among the general population, may be more difficult because governments have foresworn the tools of propaganda, indoctrination, and censorship. Even when there is consensus about national strategy, follow-up action may be difficult because so many public and private players must coordinate with one another. In short, the Achilles heel of such an open and decentralized system is that risk that the many parts contained within it may not work well together. Positive steps are necessary to promote a common worldview and coordinated action. The need for such steps increases as the system becomes larger, more decentralized, and more complex. A version of this essay was published in Canadian Public Administration in December 2024. It is reproduced with permission. The essay is based on Professor Roberts’ book, The Adaptable Country: How Canada Can Survive the Twenty-First Century, published by McGill-Queen’s University Press in September 2024.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDI0Mzg=