December 2019 saw the 15th anniversary of a landmark Act being passed, the Ontario Liberal Government’s Greenbelt Act, passed in December 2004. In December 2004, the Ontario Government passed legislation that designated 730,000 hectares of land, the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Greenbelt around the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) to combat the growing metropolitan area and the associated impacts of urban sprawl (Cadieux et al., 2013).
Figure 1 shows the extent of land which is protected as a result of the passing of this Act. The Act enabled the creation of the world’s largest permanent greenbelt, an achievement that ‘is one of the greatest contributions our generation has made to the future of Ontario’.

A greenbelt, an area of land that is undeveloped, ecologically preserved and largely covered in vegetation, provides ecological services for society that ultimately makes it healthier. While greenbelts can be found in urban and rural arenas, the GGH Greenbelt this can be found at the urban-rural fringe. This Greenbelt is largely characterised by undeveloped areas of land, or lands designated for forestry and farming which has been the case for decades and even hundreds of years (Cloke, 2000).
Land use development has been growing and growing in the Toronto, similarly to much of the rest of North America, which brings several challenges such as environmental impacts, and socio-economic impacts, with housing supply and pricing being a prevalent issue for the Toronto area and its Greenbelt. Ecologically, some of the best farmland in Canada, and also environmental services like freshwater, cleaner air and the psychological effects of ‘countryside’ are being degraded at alarmingly increasing rates (Burton, 2019).
Impacts have been continuing to multiply, not only in their diversity but also in their extremity. A report by Environmental Defence Canada has identified four main areas in which the Greenbelt is under serious impact as of present day. These are:
1- Infrastructure expansion – especially of highways, thus including sewers and pipes. This facilitates urban sprawl. This impacts on wildlife movements, farmland, poorer air quality and higher levels of pollutants.
2- Sprawl – Developers and administrations are trying to shift the Greenbelt Plan to allow development, losing out in farmland, forests and wetlands. This costs more than building on brownfield sites or expanding current urban areas.
3- Dumping – contaminated soils on Greenbelt areas pollutes rivers, drinking water and agricultural land, impacting upon wildlife.
4- Pickering Airport – building a new airport, which also brings factories and industrial zones. There will be a loss of habitat, farmland and increased levels of air and noise pollution.
Civil society, which is collective action that is voluntary and non-profit but members of the public who are non-state and non-stakeholders (Heinrich and Fioramonti, 2008), has played a significant role in the bringing about of policy and the lobbying of stakeholders in regards to the above issues and other impacts such as housing.
The aforementioned Environmental Defence (ED) Canada helped create the Ontario Greenbelt Alliance (OGA) in 2002, an coalition of 47 different activist groups that pressured the Ontario Government into passing the Greenbelt Act within three years of its creation (Burton, 2019). They were successful as they brought together a variety of people with different resources, skills and knowledges, converting their social capital into pressure on state actors. This is continuing in the current day with the ED Canada, Toronto Environmental Alliance (TEA), to provide just two examples, who provide regular updates on issues around the greenbelt and how they are trying to create change.
Linked to this action is the framing of the Greenbelt, and the countryside as a whole. How it is defined shapes the way in which is used, or not used. The Greenbelt has been seen as a potential building site for expansion of industry and housing, as leaked by Premier candidate Doug Ford. Thus, the greenspace has had its environmental services devalued, and thus the rhetoric around its intrinsic value has declined in the arena of political and industrial policy. Counter to this, is the work carried out by the TEA and ED, for example, who try to continue the idea that the Greenbelt, and green space, is an essential part of Toronto life, given the environmental services it provides.
This blog has aimed to provide an insight into Toronto’s greenbelt, its creation, the issues it is facing, and how collective action has and continues to create change despite the increasing pressure from state and economic actors to reframe the Greenbelt as an opportunity to create new areas of industry and housing, which inevitably brings challenges for the ecology of the Greenbelt. In doing so, it has highlighted the interconnected nature of policy, the urban and rural environment, and how people are interwoven into the decision making process at all scales.
Reference List:
Burton, W. (2019) Mapping civil society: the ecology of actors in the Toronto region greenbelt, Local Environment, 24 (8), 712-726.
Cadieux, K, V., L. E. Taylor, M. F. Bunce, (2013) Landscape ideology in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Greenbelt Plan: Negotiating material landscapes and abstract ideals in the city’s countryside, Journal of Rural Studies, 32, 307-319.
Cloke, P. (2000) “Rural.” In Dictionary of Human Geography, edited by R. J. Johnston, D. Gregory, G. Pratt, and M. Watts, 4th ed., 718. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Heinrich, V. F., and L. Fioramonti. (2008) ‘Introduction‘, In CIVICUS Global Survey of the State of Civil Society, Volume 2: Comparative Perspectives, edited by V. F. Heinrich and L. Fioramonti, xxix–xxxix. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
Word Count: 820



















