Neoliberal flood risk governance has become the norm in Canada and much of the rest of the global North in the interest, hypothetically, of achieving so-called efficiencies and resilience and, practically, out of desperation for access to any more resources to face a growing burden. This paper traces the path toward a flood risk governance model in Vancouver together with the development history of the city to illustrate the coproduction of urban landscape, capital, and flood risk. It situates what is intended to be a progressive “values-based” local adaptation planning program within that context to question whether or not such a program can elevate the use value of land. The paper demonstrates that a flood risk governance model further entrenches neoliberal hegemony and exchange values, with implications for urban space and how city inhabitants interact with flood hazards that are beyond the reach of values-based planning.

The Canadian City of Toronto's progress is evaluated for the implementation of its climate action plan, TransformTO, and its effectiveness in reducing sectoral emissions. Following a brief history of climate action in Toronto, the key climate policies and programs are subjected to a content analysis and assessed using an aggregate evaluation framework composed of qualitative indicators commonly used to track municipal climate action. The results of this assessment reveal that the city has made steady progress in reducing emissions, surpassing its 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 30% reduction below 1990 levels. However, Toronto is not on track to meet its 2030 target of a 65% emissions reduction from 1990 levels. Without transformational action across all sectors, it is unlikely to meet the 2030 and 2040 targets. The results are intended to strengthen implementation and evaluation efforts in Toronto. The discussion will be of interest to decision-makers and practitioners who seek to accelerate implementation of municipal climate action plans.