From supranational to intertribal - Governing Transboundary Waters: Canada, the United States, and Indigenous Communities - page 58

protection, preservation and enhancement of our shared environment for the benefit
of current and future generations” (ECC, 2013). It also committed the governments
to develop, and implement, a governance instrument to address environmental
issues of mutual concern.
As a result, the British Columbia-Washington Environmental Cooperation
Council (ECC) was established. The ECC provides a forum where officials, mostly
representing regional or state/provincial governments, can bring initiatives forward
and share information. It also provides a process for formally established task forces,
work groups, and committees to address identified priority areas. Five areas of
concern outlined the original ECC structure: Georgia Basin/Puget Sound water
quality, Columbia River/Lake Roosevelt water quality, flooding of the Nooksack
River in Northwestern Washington, regional air quality, and groundwater manage-
ment in the Abbotsford, British Columbia, and Sumas, Washington, area. A task
force represents each of these priority areas.
Structure of the Environmental Cooperation Council
The structure of the ECC reflects the priority of maintaining a strong state-
provincial relationship within a binational context. The council has four members:
two co-chairs and two members. The co-chairs represent agencies at the provincial-
state level, including the Department of Ecology and Ministry of Environment.
The two members represent regional offices of federal agencies, including the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (region 10) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada
(Pacific region). This structure aims to provide a balanced perspective between the
countries at both a federal and subnational scale.
The ECC conducts the majority of its work through task forces and committees.
The members of the task forces represent multiple scales of government and non-
governmental actors including: federal (within the regional offices), state-provincial,
city, county and district, as well as citizen and industry groups. Each task force has
two co-chairs, with representatives from British Columbia and Washington.
Interestingly, the ECC members represent their appointing governments, unlike
the IJC process, which adheres to “personal and professional” roles (rather than
speaking on behalf of the government).
The ECC and its task force committee chairs met every 6 months between
1992 and 2009 (with venues alternating between British Columbia and Washington)
to report the status of their projects. Budget cuts, staff reductions, and different
political priorities limited the meetings between 2009 and 2013. This 5-year hiatus
represents issues common in transboundary governance that are linked to govern-
ment agencies. Changing governmental regimes and fiscal priorities can immobilize
groups and stunt actions. It is encouraging that the meetings resumed under new
leadership in 2013 (Davidson, 2013). However, without safety nets in place to
ensure sustained support from governmental offices, it is important to look for
non-State solutions for transboundary issues.
In terms of the structure of the ECC, the committees report to the council,
and the council reports directly to the Premier of British Columbia and the