When Our Institutions Bypass the Communities They’re Meant to Serve
Nova Scotia’s $30 million hydraulic fracturing research agreement between Dalhousie University and the Houston government has sparked serious concerns from experts who led the province’s 2014 Nova Scotia fracking review. This isn’t just about energy policy—it’s about Indigenous sovereignty, environmental justice, community consent, and whether our institutions honor their commitments to reconciliation and transparency.
There are so many reasons that I am troubled by the recent changes the Nova Scotia government has made regarding fracking and other mining practices. Not only do I feel as a Dalhousie alumna who earned my Bachelor of Social Work from a program grounded in social justice, and as the parent of a current Dal student, that the university is making a big misstep that could ultimately have implications for the reputation of the institution. But more importantly, as a Nova Scotia-born resident who cares deeply about our local environment and our contributions to the global climate crisis, I am concerned about the direction the government is taking us as a Province (and in many ways having an influence on broader national priorities).
About more than fracking
The $30 million fracking research agreement between Dalhousie University and the Province is alarming on its own. But it’s part of a broader pattern from the Houston government: bypassing meaningful community engagement and transparency on issues that will shape Nova Scotia’s future. Former NS Energy Minister Andrew Younger and Dr. David Wheeler (who chaired the 2013-14 Independent Review Panel on Hydraulic Fracturing) have both raised serious concerns about this fracking project—and we need to listen to what they’re saying.
But this isn’t just about fracking. It’s about how decisions are being made on budget priorities, the Social Workers Act and other self-regulated health professions, and more. I’ve posted about some of those concerns previously. The common thread? Communities most affected are being shut out of decisions that will shape their lives.
Why This Matters to All of Us
Indigenous Rights & Reconciliation
The Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaw Chiefs has clearly stated their opposition to fracking. Dalhousie has made institutional commitments to reconciliation. The Province speaks about reconciliation. Yet this project proceeds without Indigenous consent.
Until we involve Indigenous peoples at EVERY stage—from concept through implementation—we are not truly acting on our commitments to reconciliation. This applies to fracking, to health profession regulation, to budget decisions, to all policy development. Reconciliation isn’t consultation after decisions are made—it’s shared decision-making from the beginning. It’s engaging with the community before a solution has been identified to ensure we understand all of the implications of the “problem” we’re trying to address, and have considered all possible solutions.
As Dr. Wheeler states in his open letter, “I note the clearly stated objections of the Mi’kmaq of Nova Scotia and the Assembly of Nova Scotia Mi’kmaw Chiefs to the prospect of hydraulic fracturing. Their principled stance should be enough for Dalhousie University to immediately suspend the project based on its own institutional commitments to Reconciliation.”
Environmental Justice
The communities most likely to be affected by exploratory drilling are often those with the least power to resist. As Andrew Younger points out, “Many of the highest potential gas fields are located under existing communities or under significant and very valuable agricultural operations, ones like for example vineyards where the impact of VOCs [volatile organic compounds] is a real one.”
Who gets to decide what happens to their land, water, and air? This same question applies across environmental decisions being made without meaningful community input.
Transparency & Institutional Integrity
As Dr. Wheeler states, “This project is commissioned research, covered by confidentiality clauses and with publication of results contingent on approval by the Province. This is clearly not objective academic research where the contracted institution is at liberty to freely share the results of its research.”
That’s not independent academic research—it’s a commercial transaction that compromises the integrity of degrees we hold and our children are earning. Similarly, government changes to professional regulation and budget priorities are being advanced without the transparency Nova Scotians deserve.
Climate Reality
In 2026, as climate impacts intensify, are we really fast-tracking fossil fuel extraction? The 2014 review recommended extensive baseline studies, community consent mechanisms, and a careful approach. This project bypasses all of that—just as other government initiatives are bypassing the careful, inclusive processes our communities need.
Environmental justice and climate justice are inseparable. The effects of fossil fuel pollution and the climate crisis disproportionately affect the most vulnerable among us—particularly low-income families, communities of color, and Indigenous communities. Fracking operations can contaminate groundwater with dangerous chemicals. The boreholes carrying gas back to the surface travel straight through aquifers—the water-bearing rocks from which many of us get our drinking water. When fracking fluid escapes into groundwater, it’s not the wealthy who suffer most—it’s the communities with the least resources to fight back or relocate.
We’re living on Mi’kma’ki, the ancestral and unceded territory of the Mi’kmaq. The land and water here don’t just belong to us—they belong to future generations. What right do we have to risk contaminating them for a fossil fuel project that is unlikely to even generate significant revenue for the province?
The Economics Don’t Add Up
The Fraser Institute report (2025) “Hydraulic Fracturing: Opportunities for Atlantic Canada” presents a pro-development perspective, suggesting economic opportunities from fracking and characterizing the Wheeler report as leading to an “indefinite ban.” The provincial government’s December 2025 joint statement made “a political case for the project” suggesting economic benefits and energy security, though the full rationale has not been made publicly available.
As Younger notes from his time as Energy Minister, “At the time of the report I travelled to Europe, the US, and Western Canada to meet with companies to see if there was even any interest in fracking onshore in NS. There was not.” He adds that “the royalty rate for onshore gas (much like water) is abysmally low. The revenue to the province is actually marginal at best with lots of available write offs.”
So why the rush? Why the $30 million investment in a speculative venture that bypasses community consent? What other priorities could that funding support? Is there not a renewable energy solution we could be prioritizing with the same funds?
What the 2014 Panel Recommended vs. What’s Happening Now
Dr. Wheeler’s panel made clear recommendations after exhaustive research involving more than 1,000 people at 11 public meetings across the province. Their 387-page report recommended:
- No fracking until comprehensive baseline health, environmental, and socioeconomic studies were complete
- Community permission to proceed before any exploration
- Full Indigenous consultation and consent
- Transparent, independent research
What’s happening now:
- Baseline studies conducted in parallel with exploration (not before)
- Confidential, commercially-driven research
- Aggressive timelines that crash through community objections
- No meaningful consent mechanisms
As Dr. Wheeler writes, “Top level stakeholder engagement and local baseline studies are to be conducted in parallel with exploration, rather than prior, which will inevitably lead to distrust and opposition as communities will rightly see this as establishing a fast track to full scale exploration.”
This Pattern Extends Beyond Nova Scotia Fracking
We’re seeing similar approaches to:
- Changes to the Social Workers Act and other health professions regulation advancing without adequate engagement from practitioners and communities in advance
- Budget decisions that affect vulnerable Nova Scotians made without transparent consultation (or any?)
- Policy development that affects Indigenous communities proceeding without Indigenous leadership
Ultimately, the only way to build trust and meaningful engagement takes time. Time and energy should be focused on those relationships, and THEN include those voices in the way forward, AFTER sharing what preliminary engagement on the issue learned.
This Isn’t About Being “Anti-Development”
It’s about doing things right. It’s about respecting Indigenous sovereignty, protecting communities, maintaining institutional integrity, and being honest about climate realities and economic viability.
The 2013-14 Nova Scotia fracking review worked because it was transparent, inclusive, and evidence-based. As Dr. Wheeler describes, their process followed six clear ethical principles including “no preconceptions,” “legitimacy of all views,” “transparency,” “evidence based,” “interdisciplinarity,” and a “precautionary approach.”
We can do better than this—on fracking, on professional regulation, on budget priorities, on all policy development.
Ways to Engage
- If you’re connected to Dal: Reach out to the Board of Governors and President about this project
- If you’re a constituent: Connect with your MLA about the pattern of bypassing community voices
- If this affects your community or profession: Your voice matters—speak out
- If you’re a Dal alumnus: Let the university know how this affects your relationship with your degree
- If you’re in an affected community: Your knowledge and concerns are essential—make them heard
- However you’re connected: Share this widely and invite others into the conversation
I’m sharing Andrew Younger’s Facebook post and Dr. Wheeler’s open letter here: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Hv6NDGdm7/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/open-submission-dalhousie-university-project-david-wheeler-qnyze
Read them. Then ask yourself: Is this the Nova Scotia we want to build?
*Written with AI assistance
Drop me a comment below and/or follow one of my social media channels.
I’m an alumnis and a former enployee. It has always been about the money and the elite privilege