From shovel-ready to shovel-worthy: are we asking the right questions about infrastructure investments?

Depending on whom you ask, Canada’s infrastructure deficit ranges from $150-billion to $1-trillion. In context, the International Institute for Sustainable Development estimates the global infrastructure deficit to reach US$90-trillion by 2030. There is also a significant infrastructure gap between urban and rural and remote regions, and between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. As we try to navigate rapidly changing socioeconomic and environmental realities, the importance of thinking critically about infrastructure cannot be overstated. The widespread failure to appropriately manage all classes of infrastructure is non-partisan, and haunts every order of government. We’re trying to better grasp the true state of our infrastructure, from municipal asset management plans, to commitments made for a National Infrastructure Assessment, to a growing infrastructure hub published by Statistics Canada. However, these efforts continue to be disjointed and incomplete, largely due to narrow and outdated definitions of what counts as infrastructure, difficulties in accurately assessing its value, and its inseparability from every other aspect of social, environmental, and economic life. Green infrastructure and social infrastructure are often left out of such accountings, with digital and energy infrastructure included in partial, hap-hazard ways. This is troubling when these are key to resiliency in the face of increasingly volatile futures. In response, many leaders now talk about moving from ‘shovel-ready’ to ‘shovel-worthy’ infrastructure investments—a good soundbite based on the argument that we should be making wise, well-planned decisions, not throwing money at whatever can produce fast photo-ops. Unfortunately, the conversation often stops short of the critical question: who and what determines worthiness? Economist Dr. Partha Dasgupta has argued that it is a massive mistake to think of natural assets as indefinitely exploitable in the service of the single-minded pursuit of unfettered economic growth. We must pay for what we use, one way or another. He uses the example of a soccer game: if you only count the goals you score, but not goals scored against you, you don’t really know if you’re winning or losing. The recent announcement that Volkswagen will build a new plant to manufacture electric vehicle batteries in rural Ontario is a strong case study for questioning how Canadian decision-makers evaluate infrastructural priorities and costs. On the surface, and certainly how it is framed by many, the battery plant is ‘shovel worthy’ because of promised jobs, economic development, and the appeal of aligning advances in EV battery manufacturing with Ontario’s connection to the automotive industry while strengthening international economic relationships. However, it is predicated on access to a ‘known reserve’ of critical minerals required to produce the batteries. This reserve is buried under the second-largest peatland ecosystem in the world: the muskeg of northern Ontario’s ‘ring of fire’ region, a critical carbon-sink and hotly contested landscape. Mining these minerals comes with massive infrastructural demands and complex socio-ecological impacts, particularly with respect to the inherent and constitutionally protected rights of First Nations in the region. Even if this weren’t the case, there is scarce infrastructure available for transporting those minerals from roughly 500 kilometres north of Thunder Bay all the way south to St. Thomas—very nearly the entire length of the province. Have we accounted for this when balancing infrastructure, environment, and economy? The plant itself will be purpose-built on annexed farmland, which, once developed, represents a permanent loss. Why not transform already existing, dormant industrial infrastructure? Plants and mines require people. Rural and remote regions are particularly challenged by the uneven labour market dynamics and housing crisis being experienced across the country. Where will workers live? How will they access education or healthcare? How will they get water and where will their garbage go? Where will they get groceries or access a bank? These questions cannot be waved away with Field of Dreams-esque claims of “build it and they will come," nor are they reactionary BANANA-hyperbole (‘Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything’; the cousin to NIMBYism). These are reasonable, critical questions that highlight important and under-discussed tensions in the mismatch between critical asset management and current political promises. There are always trade-offs, but we must approach them with eyes wide open. Everything has a cost. Our leaders must provide clear explanations for how they determine the worth of every infrastructural action or inaction. The bill is way past overdue. S. Ashleigh Weeden, MPA, PhD is an award-winning rural futurist whose work focuses on the way people, place, and power dynamics are reflected in, and affected by, policymaking, particularly in rural contexts. She earned her PhD in rural studies from the University of Guelph and currently serves as a Research Associate with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (Ontario office). The Hill Times

From shovel-ready to shovel-worthy: are we asking the right questions about infrastructure investments?

The importance of thinking critically about infrastructure cannot be overstated as we navigate rapidly changing socioeconomic and environmental realities.

Canada’s aging crisis and a call for reform in eldercare

Canada is still climbing the mountain, but Murray Sinclair showed us the path forward

Trump’s win is bad for news for Trudeau

When the pendulum swings: how does the public service respond to political polarization?

Canada goes Swiftie

Nightmare on Pennsylvania Avenue

It’s time for a radical rethink on Canada’s infrastructure planning, but who will have the courage to lead?

Canada cannot rely on a branch-plant strategy for the future

Promising prospects for Canada in global transition to new energy world

Canadian ownership is critical if we are to prosper from minerals strategy

All hands on deck required in the transformation to electric mobility

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Get free news updates

Submit a guest opinion article

From shovel-ready to shovel-worthy: are we asking the right questions about infrastructure investments?

The importance of thinking critically about infrastructure cannot be overstated as we navigate rapidly changing socioeconomic and environmental realities.

Get The Policy Briefings Newsletter