Cities, Climate and Inequalities – ILEAU: An innovative greening campaign contributing to the ecological transition and urban resilience of Montreal’s east end communities

Caroline Côté, master’s student in Urban Studies (UQAM)

Introduction

This article examines research on Interventions locales en environnement et aménagement urbain (ILEAU), a greening campaign created in 2015 by the Conseil régional de l’environnement de Montréal (CRE-Montréal). The campaign was supported by a MITACS Accélération excellence grant and was the subject of a master’s thesis in urban studies. In this article, I present certain elements of both the thesis and the research project as a type of follow-up summary for CRE-Montréal. The aim of the study was to identify the most promising principles, processes and actions of the campaign as a way to design an ILEAU action model that could be transferred to other territories. ILEAU is a greening campaign combining a variety of measures aimed at reducing urban heat islands in the east end of Montreal. One element in particular stood out during the research project: social innovation. While CRE-Montréal has never positioned itself as an organization focused on social innovation, it forms the basis of the ILEAU campaign. In a territorial planning context, certain climate change actions have been shown to augment rather than reduce, or keep stable, sociospatial and environmental inequalities (Anguelovski et al., 2016). Social innovation is presented here as an alternative to traditional urban land planning. This article therefore aims to demonstrate, through the example of ILEAU, how social innovation can enable environmental advances while reducing sociospatial and environmental inequalities.

Review of the scientific literature

Social innovation

The concept of social innovation appears to be a promising way of addressing social issues (Avelino et al., 2019; Howaldt and Kopp, 2012). Put simply, social innovation is defined in the literature as follows: “an innovation that is social in both process and outcome, that empowers individuals and that leads to social change” (Hubert, 2010). Social innovation is understood as a process of adaptation and learning, alongside the construction and ongoing coordination of a network of local social players, with the aim of improving the well-being of the communities where the social innovation is introduced (Harrisson and Vézina, 2006; Richez-Battesti et al., 2012). A strong emphasis is placed on the empowerment and participation of stakeholders, including the service recipients, with the aim of increasing their capacity to act in their environment (Besançon, 2013; Cloutier, 2003; Richez-Battesti et al., 2012).

Environmental inequalities

The effects of climate change are not equitably distributed, and some populations are more at risk of suffering its inconveniences and their attendant repercussions on health and quality of life (Chancel, 2020; Guivarch and Taconet, 2020). The literature refers to these phenomena as environmental inequalities, defined as “inequalities in exposure to environmental risks, exposure that is deemed ‘disproportionate’ when certain social groups or categories suffer significantly more than others” (Larrère, 2017, p. 7; own translation). The complexity of environmental inequalities lies at the intersection of exposure, which is linked to territory, and vulnerabilities, which are induced by social inequalities. The consequences for individuals who accumulate exposure and vulnerabilities are greater and harder to overcome: “at equal danger, the poorest and most disadvantaged are the most exposed: they are more fragile, they have fewer alternatives, they have more difficulty to recover” (Larrère, 2017, p. 10; own translation). The issue of access is also central to environmental inequalities: access to environmental infrastructures, such as green spaces, parks, and waterfronts (Guivarch and Taconet, 2020; Laurent, 2015), as well as access to political decisions that have an influence on spatial planning and the environment (Larrère, 2009).

While environmental inequalities invariably involve exposure, they do not necessarily imply vulnerability. For example, as illustrated by Laurent (2015), riparian land tends to be owned by the financially well-off, given its high land value. At the same time, being located on the banks of a watercourse increases the risk of flooding. And yet, although these individuals are at risk, they are generally in the position to relocate in the event of rising water levels.

Highly urbanized environments offer another example. They are more prone to urban heat islands (UHIs), since they combine the two main factors that generate UHIs: absence of trees and vegetation, and soil mineralization. From a public health perspective, UHIs are a cause for concern, and as they increase the frequency, duration and intensity of heat waves, they are particularly harmful to the most vulnerable. According to Anquez and Herlem (2011), these include “people with chronic diseases, socially isolated populations, very young children, workers, outdoor workers, people with low socioeconomic status, high-level outdoor athletes, people with mental disorders and the elderly” (p. 6; own translation). Therefore, greening projects are one way of countering the effects of heat islands and reducing their negative impact on people’s health.

Direct links between social innovation, inequality and environmental justice are fairly recent in the scientific literature. However, certain components of social innovation, such as empowerment and participation, have often been invoked as elements favouring the implementation of mechanisms to combat social and environmental inequalities (Bacqué and Biewener, 2015; Ballet et al., 2015; Deldrève et al., 2019; Ghorra-Gobin, 2005; Larrère, 2017).

The case: the ILEAU campaign

ILEAU is a greening campaign coordinated by CRE-Montréal. Created in 1996, the organization aims to promote sustainable development and protect the environment. CRE-Montréal regularly takes a stand on local and regional issues, helping to inform both the general public and political bodies about decisions that have a major impact on the environment. The campaign was created with funding from Fonds vert as part of the 2013‒2020 Climate Change Action Plan. Through the fight against UHIs, ILEAU also aims to increase and protect biodiversity, improve active and safe travel, promote access to public transport hubs, increase access to nature, and accelerate the implementation of measures to adapt to and reduce the effects of climate change.

Study area

The ILEAU campaign currently covers eight of the nineteen boroughs on the island of Montreal: Montreal North, Saint-Léonard, Mercier-Hochelaga-Maisonneuve, Anjou, Rivière-des-Prairies-Pointe-aux-Trembles (2015), Ahuntsic-Cartierville, Villeray-Saint-Michel-Parc-Extension and Rosemont-La-Petite-Patrie (2018). Far from random, the selection of this 147 km² territory was based on maps showing the UHIs and the deprivation index of the island of Montreal. The east end of Montreal, for example, had both a higher UHI and deprivation index. In other words, economic vulnerability and exposure to UHIs are intertwined, making their impact even more severe.

Methodology

As a first step, I carried out documentary research on the ILEAU campaign. This included holding discussions and meetings with CRE-Montréal staff members as well as analyses of internal documentation provided by CRE-Montréal, of various press articles and websites, and of the monthly ILEAU newsletter spanning 2016 to 2021 inclusively. Next, I conducted 24 interviews with various stakeholders (citizens, businesses, institutions, community organizations) to document their appreciation of the ILEAU campaign.

Results

Social innovation to counter environmental inequalities

Like CRE-Montréal, the ILEAU campaign is based on concertation, meaning that a democratic mechanism was set up to guide the management of the territory. Concertation is an interesting approach that “can help consolidate community networks, promote cohesion and social inclusion, enhance the knowledge gained from experience and increase participants’ sense of control over the development of their living environment” (Bernier et al., 2010, p. 175; own translation).

To this end, ILEAU holds meetings biannually with community partners to develop and update a collective vision. These meetings, which generally take place face-to-face, contribute to knowledge sharing and enable the emergence of new solutions that come directly from the individuals facing the issues on a daily basis. Through the actions of its campaign, ILEAU presents itself not as a project-maker but as an intermediary. In this way, these meetings are an opportunity to recognize expertise in the field and to bring together the various players who can help and complement each other to create and increase their mutual benefits.

Funding and support for greening projects are among the ways in which ILEAU aims to increase the amount of green space in the territory and combat UHIs. Serving as an intermediary between funders and the public, ILEAU makes funding applications more accessible for different organizations (community, institutions, businesses, housing cooperatives). Since 2015, more than 202 greening projects have been completed. To realize greening projects, ILEAU finances part of the costs and assembles a team to accompany beneficiaries through the greening process.

Developed in consultation with the beneficiaries, these greening projects take the form of planting days, which project beneficiaries are asked to participate in. These days enable individuals to take action and develop knowledge and know-how related to greening and their environment. Planting days also create opportunities for socialization and interaction. Some interviewees who had carried out greening projects with ILEAU even found the opportunity for socialization to be greater than that of the greening activity itself. Moreover, beneficiaries who committed to do maintenance chores were called upon to be outdoors slightly more often, which created moments conducive to socializing. One participant developed a network of friends in her neighbourhood simply by being outdoors gardening. “People are interested in what’s going on, in the varieties of flowers being planted, or simply in the new beauty of the place,” she said. Many now stop to chat or ask questions, enabling a first contact that might not have happened without the greening project. In fact, social networks are one of the main factors mentioned by the INSPQ (2021) that can contribute to dealing with climate change.

Like the other activities, Explo-vélo excursions are held locally through ILEAU and include a form of concertation. They consists of cycling with various local players (the population, community organizations, institutions, businesses) along a predefined route to identify mobility and safety issues. During the activity, individuals are called upon to experience the territory. Subsequently, their experience and impressions of the bike ride are reviewed, and the group comes up with recommendations based on the route taken. ILEAU then draws up a summary document containing the recommendations made during the activity, to be submitted to the borough councils where the activity took place. This type of activity enables citizens to formulate and share their experiences of the city. Through ILEAU, the voices of those present at the event can be brought into political decision-making spheres and possibly yield an influence on land-use planning.

The ILEAU campaign has made many gains. Apart from the greening gains, which enabled it to fulfill its main objective of reducing UHIs, there were also significant social gains, underscoring the merit of building more resilient communities.

In the context of the ILEAU campaign, we therefore understand social innovation as a process that creates impacts that go beyond the initial framework of action, that multiply and that endure in their own right, since they are borne by individuals who have developed new knowledge and know-how during the various activities in which they have participated (empowerment).

Limits

Social innovation that encourages concertation and collaborative action certainly brings about transformations. We see results in the reduction of UHIs, for example, although even this comes with certain social challenges. Some of the activities above may not reach the most vulnerable people, either because of the nature of the activity or because concertation cannot guarantee that the groups present are equal in standing or have the same influence in decision-making (Blondiaux, 2001; Fontan and Lachapelle, 2000). This type of activity may also contribute to the exclusion of the populations it is trying to help. Moreover, since ILEAU adopts an intermediary posture and opts for concertation mechanisms, its demands are more moderate. In interviews, this positioning has sometimes been perceived as a lack of will by citizens who are actively involved in the development and greening of their territory.

Finally, ILEAU has created a structuring set of multiple and diversified activities (greening, biodiversity, active mobility, public transit, etc.), making it somewhat difficult to understand the campaign as a whole. While all interviewees associate ILEAU with greening, the other dimensions of the campaign are more rarely mentioned.

Conclusion

In the fight against climate change and environmental inequalities, ILEAU’s actions have a number of benefits. The primary two are: a reduction of the exposure of vulnerable populations to UHIs, through the targeted selection of the intervention territory and greening actions; and the empowerment of communities by engaging individuals in action and encouraging participation that leads to active citizenship.

The concertation and participation approaches inherent to social innovation have added a human factor to the process, enabling us to address broader issues. However, ILEAU’s many fields of intervention and its positioning as an intermediary still seem to be poorly understood by the general population, which can limit the degree of participation or support for the campaign.

Through the ILEAU campaign, social innovation makes it possible to involve citizens, organizations, institutions and businesses in the development of their territory (social dimension) and ultimately in the fight against climate change (environmental dimension) by providing them with natural and financial resources (economic dimension). It comprises a complex approach that brings multiple dimensions together to function in a mutually supportive way. I conclude that social innovation within local intervention campaigns, whether in greening or other areas, benefits from further exploration to ensure understanding and recognition of the different means of intervention.

To cite this article

Côté, C. (2022). ILEAU: An innovative greening campaign contributing to the ecological transition and urban resilience of Montreal’s east end communities. Répertoire de recherche Villes, climat et inégalités. VRM ‒ Villes Régions Monde. https://www.vrm.ca/ileau-une-campagne-de-verdissement-innovante-qui-participe-a-la-transition-ecologique-et-a-la-resilience-urbaine-des-communautes-de-lest-de-montreal-2

Reference Text

ILEAU, un modèle d’innovation sociale : mobiliser les citoyen.enne.s grâce à la relation au « chez-soi » (titre provisoire), mémoire de maîtrise (à paraître), sous la direction de Sophie Paquin, UQAM.  

La boîte à outils (à paraître), créée avec le Conseil régional de l’environnement de Montréal.

References

Anguelovski, I., Shi, L., Chu, E., Gallagher, D., Goh, K., Lamb, Z., Reeve, K., et Teicher, H. (2016). « Equity Impacts of Urban Land Use Planning for Climate Adaptation: Critical Perspectives from the Global North and South ». Journal of Planning Education and Research, 36(3), p. 333‑348.

Anquez, P., et Herlem, A. (2011). Les îlots de chaleur dans la région métropolitaine de Montréal : causes, impacts et solutions. Rapport de la Chaire de responsabilité sociale et de développement durable, ESG, UQAM.

Asselin, H. (2022). « La transition énergétique est-elle possible au Québec sans refondation du modèle d’occupation du territoire? ». Dans A. Z. Mendez, J.-F. Bissonnette et J. Dupras (dir.), Une économie écologique pour le Québec, p. 43‑59.

Audet, R. (2016). « Le champ des sustainability transitions : origines, analyses et pratiques de recherche ». Cahiers de recherche sociologique, 58, p. 73‑93.

Avelino, F., Wittmayer, J., Pel, B., Weaver, P., Dumitru, A., Haxeltine, A., Kemp, R., Jorgensen, M., Bauler, T., Ruijsink, S., et O’Riordan, T. (2019). « Transformative Social Innovation and (Dis)Empowerment ». Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, p. 195‑206.

Bacqué, M-H., et Biewener, C. (2015). L’empowerment, une pratique émancipatrice? La Découverte.

Ballet, J., Bazin, D., et Pelenc, J. (2015). « Justice environnementale et approche par les capabilités ». Revue de philosophie économique, 1(16), p. 13‑39.

Blondiaux, L. (2001). « Démocratie locale et participation citoyenne : la promesse et le piège ». Mouvements, 5(18), p. 44‑51.

Bendimerad, S. (2018). « L’innovation sociale : un concept évolutif et polysémique ». Revue internationale de l’économie sociale, 3(349), p. 6‑13.

Bernier, J., Clavier, C., et Giasson, G. (2010). « Développement social local à Montréal : approche concertée de lutte contre les inégalités ». Dans L. Potvin, M.-J. Moquet et C. M. Jones (dir.), Réduire les inégalités sociales en santé, INPES, p. 168‑177.

Besançon, E. (2013). « L’innovation sociale en pratiques solidaires : processus, résultat, impacts et changements ». Dans E. Besançon, N. Chochoy et T. Guyon (dir.), L’innovation sociale : principes et fondements d’un concept (p. 49‑82). L’Harmattan.

Besançon, E., et Chochoy, N. (2015). « Les marqueurs d’innovation sociale : une approche institutionnaliste ». Revue internationale de l’économie sociale, 336, p. 80‑93.

Chancel, L. (2020). Unsustainable Inequalities: Social Justice and the Environment. Harvard University Press.

Cloutier, J. (2003). Qu’est-ce que l’innovation sociale? Cahier ET0314, Centre de recherche sur les innovations sociales.

Deldrève, V., Lewis, N., Moreau, S., et Reynolds, K. (2019). « Les nouveaux chantiers de la justice environnementale ». Vertigo, 19(1).

Fontan, J.-M., et Lachapelle, R. (2000). Concertation/partenariat. Formation à l’Institut de développement communautaire. Université Concordia, p. 1-24.

Ghorra-Gobin, C. (2005). « Justice environnementale et intérêt général aux États-Unis. De leur convergence à l’heure de l’intercommunalité ». Les Annales de la recherche urbaine, 99, p. 14‑19.

INSPQ. (2019). Indicateurs en lien avec les vagues de chaleur et la santé de la population : mise à jour. Rapport d’analyse, Direction de la santé environnementale et de la toxicologie.

Guivarch, C., et Taconet, N. (2020). « Inégalités mondiales et changement climatique ». Revue de l’OFCE, 1(165), p. 35‑70.

Harrisson, D., et Vézina, M. (2006). « L’innovation sociale, une introduction ». Annales de l’économie publique, sociale et coopérative, 77(2), p. 129‑138.

Howaldt, J., et Kopp, R. (2012). « Shaping Social Innovation by Social Research ». Dans H.-W. Franz, J. Hochgerner et J. Howaldt (dir.), Challenge Social Innovation: Potentials for Business, Social Entrepreneurship, Welfare and Civil Society, p. 43‑55.

Hubert, A. (2010). Empowering People, Driving Change: Social Innovation in the European Union, BEPA.

INSPQ. (2021). Les aléas affectés par les changements climatiques : effets sur la santé, vulnérabilités et mesures d’adaptation. Synthèse des connaissances, Direction de la santé environnementale et de la toxicologie.

Larrère, C. (2009). « La justice environnementale ». Multitudes, 1(36), p. 156‑162.

Larrère, C. (2017). Les inégalités environnementales. Presses universitaires de France.

Laurent, E. (2015). « La social-écologie : une perspective théorique et empirique ». Revue française des affaires sociales, 1-2, p. 125‑143.

Richez-Battesti, N., Petrella, F., et Vallade, D. (2012). « L’innovation sociale, une notion aux usages pluriels : quels enjeux et défis pour l’analyse? ». Innovations, 2(38), p. 15‑36.

Rousselle, M. (2013). « L’innovation sociale, une solution durable aux défis sociaux ». Caisse nationale d’allocations familiales, 6(180), p. 140‑148.