What We Heard: Canada’s Sustainable Finance Taxonomy – Methodology Report

Business Future Pathways’ 2026 report summarizes stakeholder feedback on the methodology for Canada’s Sustainable Finance Taxonomy, including green and transition activities, technical screening criteria, Do No Significant Harm and Minimum Social Safeguards. It also examines transition finance, Indigenous rights, FPIC, biodiversity, climate adaptation and safeguards intended to support credible climate-aligned investment in Canada.

Business Future Pathways202612 Oct 2026

PublisherBusiness Future Pathways

Year2026

RegionUS

FormatPDF, 1.2 MB

5views

Key Takeaways

More than three-quarters of respondents supported the proposed green category, which focuses on zero- and near-zero-emission activities, while calling for clearer thresholds and safeguards to minimize greenwashing risk.
More than two-thirds of respondents supported a distinct transition category for high-emitting sectors such as steel, cement and chemicals, with strong demand for measurable criteria, time-bound eligibility, carbon lock-in protections and credible entity-level transition plans.
The proposed abatement measures category generated the greatest disagreement: roughly two-thirds of public respondents opposed it, while about one-quarter expressed conditional support subject to strong safeguards against fossil fuel expansion, asset-life extension and carbon lock-in.
Around three-quarters of respondents supported forward-looking, quantitative and science-based technical screening criteria, with a preference for technology-neutral and performance-based thresholds that are reviewed periodically.
Stakeholders emphasized that Indigenous rights, UNDRIP and Free, Prior and Informed Consent should be central to taxonomy safeguards. Indigenous participants repeatedly called for FPIC and UNDRIP to operate as minimum standards rather than aspirational considerations. BFP-report-What-We-Heard-Sustai…

65,000+ subscribers. Unsubscribe anytime.