This study headlines Positive Energy鈥檚 research on the models of and limits to consensus-building. (PDF, 2.4MB). It explores two key questions. First, how key energy and climate issues became polarized along partisan lines. Second, it identifies several significant limits to consensus-building on energy and climate. It relies on numerous data sources, most notably in-depth interviews with 50 Canadian energy and environmental leaders.
The study evaluates how interview participants understand Canada鈥檚 history of energy and climate policy, how they think about the language of 鈥減olarization鈥 and 鈥渃onsensus鈥, and the extent to which they actually want to work with their ideological and partisan counterparts. From there, the study identifies three limits to consensus-building and identifies strategies for overcoming them: toxic partisanship (sufficient dislike for partisan opponents where civility and bipartisanship become difficult or impossible), negative affect (dislike for out-groups; often associated with 鈥渦s versus them鈥 thinking), and false polarization (incorrect perceptions of polarization).
The findings are positioned within scholarly literature and Positive Energy鈥檚 broader body of work. They aim to better equip decision-makers keen to seize upon the new, fragile cross-partisan consensus around 鈥渘et zero by 2050鈥.